This issue and proposal has been in JIRA now for about a month. Activity (perhaps interest) has been minimal.
At this point, I'm not sure what to do. Those who have shown interest have been positive about the proposal. Can (should) we reinitiate the vote? Are the votes that have been offered adequate to continue? -Ryan > -----Original Message----- > From: Ryan Heaton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 11:44 AM > To: 'Jakarta Commons Developers List'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [jelly][vote] APT tag library > > I have created a JIRA issue with a comprehensive description, > and I've included some examples on what this new tag library can do. > > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JELLY-225 > > Comments would be appreciated. > > -Ryan > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Libbrecht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 2:10 PM > > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > Subject: Re: [jelly][vote] APT tag library > > > > Ryan, > > > > The idea of making it a jira issue is that it's a place you > can post > > to... and that people can see and comment on. > > I'd put there a tag-library similarly packaged to others in > > jelly/jelly-tags/. > > > > How does it sound ? > > > > paul > > > > Ryan Heaton wrote: > > > I have not posted a jira issue. I was not aware that was needed. > > > > > > You'll have to be patient with me, I really have no idea > > how the process to add a component works. I would be happy > to proceed > > > through whatever formal process has been established. If > > someone could explain to me what needs to happen, I'd be > > happy to drive > > > it. > > > > > > I don't even mind if the component isn't wanted in the > > commons, I'll put it in sourceforge otherwise. From where I > > stand, I've got > > > something cool, I believe it will be very useful to many > > people, and if you want it as part of jelly, I'm willing to > > submit it and > > > even to maintain it. > > > > > > Please advise. > > > > > > -Ryan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Paul Libbrecht [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 2:17 AM > > >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > >> Subject: Re: [jelly][vote] APT tag library > > >> > > >> I'm slowly catching up on this. > > >> Maybe we need to have life with Ryan a bit longer before > > becoming a > > >> committer. > > >> In order to send a fully fledged component proposal, Ryan, > > dare I ask > > >> whether you've posted a jira issue already ? > > >> This is really needed for all to look at. > > >> > > >> thanks > > >> > > >> paul > > >> > > >> robert burrell donkin wrote: > > >> > > >>> On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 09:48 -0700, Ryan Heaton wrote: > > >>> > > >>> > > >>>> I'm adjusting the thread subject to reflect the fact that > > >>>> > > >> there is a vote going on for two things: > > >> > > >>>> 1. Acceptance of the new APT tag library (described below) > > >>>> 2. Acceptance of me as a committer to support the new apt > > >>>> > > >> tag library, if it gets accepted. > > >> > > >>>> So far, I have recorded three people voting positive for > > >>>> > > >> both proposals: > > >> > > >>>> Dion Gillard > > >>>> Hans Gilde > > >>>> Paul Libbrecht > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> hi ryan > > >>> > > >>> (sorry to have to start being a little legalistic...) > > >>> > > >>> i know that this can be a little confusing but there > are votes and > > >>> VOTEs... > > >>> > > >>> both of these need to be official ASF votes. these need > > >>> > > >> more formality > > >> > > >>> that just vague +1's against your proposal. the subject > > >>> > > >> should be [VOTE] > > >> > > >>> (jelly isn't necessary since VOTEs are commons-wide and may > > >>> > > >> result in > > >> > > >>> some filters not recognising your post as a vote thread). > > >>> > > >>> we're really only getting up to speed with the new processes for > > >>> accepting code which is not original so you might need a little > > >>> patience. so, apologies in advance... > > >>> > > >>> i'm not sure there's any consensus about the best way > to approach > > >>> software grants but i'd expect to understand the > provinence of the > > >>> donated code before i'd be willing to +1. i'd also > expect a jelly > > >>> committer to start the VOTE thread. > > >>> > > >>> it's not really possible to have conditional approval for a > > >>> > > >> committer > > >> > > >>> and it's poor netiquette to nominate yourself as a committer. > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
