Stipe Tolj wrote:
no good, alas; i'll be on the road driving to another town at that point.
i *should* be back within a couple of hours, though. :-/
Ken,
please find the #kannel IRC channel log of the debate at
http://www.kannel.org/irc-sessions/
from last friday and today.
People have rai
Ted,
> There are a few XML beans specific items in this list, but I'd like to
> propose that we start a discussion of exit criteria based on this list.
Seems a reasonable starting point. I took the liberty of putting a generic
version of it on the Wiki:
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.c
On 9/22/2003 4:52 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ted,
If I were you, I think that I would subscribe myself to the Incubator PMC
mailing list. That way you can see how things are settling in (I would
expect that they could use a bit of time to consolidate all of the
discussion), and if they say that
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I hope that the policies, procedures, responsibilities, and
ultimate accountabilities, will have a tangible and net-
positive impact on the overall development of the Apache Community.
:-)
That's it - no umbrella questions?
This is so dissapointing!
Steve!
--
Stephen
> I hope that the policies, procedures, responsibilities, and
> ultimate accountabilities, will have a tangible and net-
> positive impact on the overall development of the Apache Community.
:-)
--- Noel
-
To unsubscrib
On 9/22/2003 4:50 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
From: Rodent of Unusual Size
what's the role of the incubator pmc in this? at the least, it's a set
of passionate asf people who are essentially in agreement about what
makes something a genuine 'apache'-style project, who review the
reports o
On 9/22/2003 6:28 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Another cut at roles and responsibilities
Date: 23/09/2003 11:20:12
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Stephen,
Actually, I think you had it right the first time. The XML Project PMC
should take the first
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Once I got past some of your phrasing, which I consider somewhat
injudiciously selected considering your likely audience,
Hang on a tick - I have to look this one up!
LOL
Well, for a start, referring to every decision making body as dysfunctional
wasn't the
> Lists without "Reply-To" Header ...
If the PMC wants the list properties changed, perhaps because of requests
from the list users, they can submit a request to have the list
reconfigured.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:44:05 -0400
(Subject: RE: technology sucks)
"Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your comment
> (http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgNo=41)
> was about a Reply-To header.
Oh, yes. yes.
*** NOTE *** Lists without "Reply-To" Header would be su
> > As underspecified as the process may have been, you are engaging
> > in vast overengineering.
> If there is overengineering I need specific in order to address the
concern.
I hope you can see the humor in that juxtaposition.
--- Noel
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Think of this entire process as the establishment of a set of imutable
procedures that will protect us from the breakdown of their system.
Things don't work that way, Stephen. People don't. Especially the kind of
people who participate here. This is not a community o
> Think of this entire process as the establishment of a set of imutable
> procedures that will protect us from the breakdown of their system.
Things don't work that way, Stephen. People don't. Especially the kind of
people who participate here. This is not a community of bureaucrats. As
under
>>Once I got past some of your phrasing, which I consider somewhat
>>injudiciously selected considering your likely audience,
> Hang on a tick - I have to look this one up!
LOL
Well, for a start, referring to every decision making body as dysfunctional
wasn't the wisest course of action in my vi
> if this relates to an actionable issue - could you be a touch more
> specific as to the action.
Actually, at this point I think that discussion has converged, a consensus
appears to have emerged, and since Berin has taken a lead on coalescing this
material, I think it makes sense to give him (an
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Steve,
Not actually sure we are disagreeing. Let me
just add some thoughts and see where we get to...
Zut ... Australia really is at the end of the earth relative to France!
(Zut translated into Australian is B* H***).
. Tell me about it. The time zones ar
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> OK, based on everything I've read from this and a few of the
> other threads on this list, which I've just caught up to (I
> picked a bad weekend to attend a wedding that took me off email
> ;-), I am going to propose to the other XMLBeans folks that we
> do the following:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Stephen,
If we ever sit down in some hypothetical cafe, remind me to have a talk with
you about how to present an argument for best effect. :-)
Once I got past some of your phrasing, which I consider somewhat
injudiciously selected considering your likely audience,
Han
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Actually, I think you had it right the first time. The XML Project PMC
should take the first responsibility to find someone where their
representative to stop doing his role.
Actually - I disagree.
Actually, you didn't. What you did was engage in a discuss
> If [we] would think of the creation of "i18n.apache.org" or
> "document.apache.org", (i18n TLP / Documentation TLP),
> 'projects produce code' principle could be an obstacle
As I recall, there is was discussed at length on [EMAIL PROTECTED] The proposal
at the time was to give it a mailing list
> >Actually, I think you had it right the first time. The XML Project PMC
> >should take the first responsibility to find someone where their
> >representative to stop doing his role.
> Actually - I disagree.
Actually, you didn't. What you did was engage in a discussion of individual
vs group r
> Please note that "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> list is suffering the same disease.
It looks to me that projects@ has both an owner and a moderator (although it
could use more moderators).
Your comment
(http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
he.org&msgNo=41) was about a Reply-To header.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Stephen,
Actually, I think you had it right the first time. The XML Project PMC
should take the first responsibility to find someone where their
representative to stop doing his role.
Actually - I disagree.
If I say that the Board is responsible. What I am saying is th
Stephen,
If we ever sit down in some hypothetical cafe, remind me to have a talk with
you about how to present an argument for best effect. :-)
Once I got past some of your phrasing, which I consider somewhat
injudiciously selected considering your likely audience, it occurred to me
that althoug
> From: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: RE: Another cut at roles and responsibilities
> Date: 23/09/2003 11:20:12
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Stephen,
>
> Actually, I think you had it right the first time. The XML Project PMC
> should take the first responsibility to find some
Steve,
Not actually sure we are disagreeing. Let me
just add some thoughts and see where we get to...
> Zut ... Australia really is at the end of the earth relative to France!
> (Zut translated into Australian is B* H***).
. Tell me about it. The time zones are
playing havoc with me.
> B
Stephen,
Actually, I think you had it right the first time. The XML Project PMC
should take the first responsibility to find someone where their
representative to stop doing his role.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Small change in wording. "If Ted stops doing his role as Shepherd,
then I would see it as the responsibility of the XML Project PMC
Chair" to step in and find someone else."
Wooop - a compound correction to an otherwise perfect composition:
"If Ted stops doing his
Berin:
Have just read though your email and I feel that I have very strong
empathy with the position your raising - but all the same I'm going to
disagree with you! I'm confident that if we were in a cafe down in the
14e we would tie this up nicely in less that a couple of hours. But
that is
Roy,
Please note that "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
list is suffering the same disease.
I said this before at that mailing list. Noone responded.
It (nonfeasance) really humiliated me.
__ Tetsuya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> __
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:50:26 -0700
(Subject: technology sucks)
"Roy T. Fielding" <[EM
So, it seems that much of our collective constipation on votes
over the past year has been due to the pmc mailing list being
without moderators or owner, apparently due to a strange
combination of options given when the list was created.
A couple of people are now moderators, and I just fixed the
l
> From: Rodent of Unusual Size
> > 2) isn't the incubation more an oversight group, a task force, then a
> > project?
>
> you seem to be harking back to 'projects produce code'. i disagree with
> that perspective; 'projects produce goodness for the asf' might be closer.
> in this case, the i
Ted,
If I were you, I think that I would subscribe myself to the Incubator PMC
mailing list. That way you can see how things are settling in (I would
expect that they could use a bit of time to consolidate all of the
discussion), and if they say that they're ready, find out whom is going to
take
Steve,
> From: Stephen McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 1. Entities (Board, Parent, Incubator PMC) should not assigned actional
> responsibilities - only decision responsibility. Actional reposibility
> should be assigned to roles that are represented by accountable
> individuals. T
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
We should ask ourselves if we expect to provide a home for extended
Perl, C or whatever APIs, naming services for those languages, etc. If
the answer is "yes", then fine, we can all agree and move forward.
my opinion is that standards-based Directory + Identity services
co
On 9/22/2003 1:27 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
+1. I don't think that we need have multiple people fufill all these
roles. If the sponsor/shepherd/mentor is going to be a member of the
incubator PMC (see 1 above), then they ought to be trusted to follow the
incubator guidlines (once they exist).
> We should ask ourselves if we expect to provide a home for extended
> Perl, C or whatever APIs, naming services for those languages, etc. If
> the answer is "yes", then fine, we can all agree and move forward.
> my opinion is that standards-based Directory + Identity services
> could make up a
> From: Roy T. Fielding [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 10:06 PM
> There have been no objections, so I would appreciate it if we could
> get rid of the incubator unix group in favor of apcvs for everything
> except the incubator-core repository:
Done.
I'll cleanup th
> > let's make sure we're agreed on terminology here. so far, the terms
> > 'sponsor', 'shepherd', and 'mentor' have been conflated. my view is
> > that the latter two are the same and refer to a single individual, and
> > that a sponsor is either that same person or the asf project that has
> >s
Phil Steitz wrote:
See comments inline
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I have no problem with protocol-centric projects, and no problem with
language-centric projects, but I do have a problem with
protocol-centric
projects that assume one implementation language is "best".
OK, I've seen enough langu
FWIW, my opinion is that standards-based Directory + Identity services
could make up a natural "semantic domain" (actually more natural than
"XML") and we should focus on defining this domain, rather than what
languages or language-specific extensions will be supported (much as
that diminishes
There have been no objections, so I would appreciate it if we could
get rid of the incubator unix group in favor of apcvs for everything
except the incubator-core repository:
ssh cvs.apache.org
cd /home/cvs
chgrp -R apcvs incubator incubator-altrmi incubator-ftpserver \
See comments inline
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I have no problem with protocol-centric projects, and no problem with
language-centric projects, but I do have a problem with protocol-centric
projects that assume one implementation language is "best".
OK, I've seen enough language wars to understand y
OK, based on everything I've read from this and a few of the
other threads on this list, which I've just caught up to (I
picked a bad weekend to attend a wedding that took me off email
;-), I am going to propose to the other XMLBeans folks that we
do the following:
1. Create a build of a cvs sna
I don't know if we want to tackle this at the same time as Steven's
document on entering the incubator, but at the moment I"m more focused
on how to get podlings out of the incubator rather than getting them in.
A while ago I proposed some exit criteria for XML beans -- I haven't
pushed them be
On 9/22/2003 5:23 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
...
I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor. From
what I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd. If the
Sponsor wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the
responsibilities, ot
On 9/22/2003 5:39 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
members? members and officials? everybody committer that previously has
a record of helping incubation? just curious of what feelings are.
anoth
On 9/21/2003 10:59 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ted Leung wrote:
Minimum size is not enough here. There also needs to be a diversity
requirement. For example XMLBeans must have no more than 50% of its
committers from a single organization.
Good exit criteria.
You're right, of course
Okay guys, I get the message. I'll ask XML beans to make a
"xmlbeans-is-not-part-of-the-ASF-1.0" release.
On 9/22/2003 10:09 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
i think the point is that a podling is *not* part of the
asf, and is therefore not entitled to distribute so
> I like the notion of the "Sponsoring Entity" at this addresses
> the entity into which a prodling is destined.
Apparently, the part that "destination is an exit criteria" hasn't resonated
with you. Yes, it is helpful to have an idea up front, but not in the sense
where you took it, specifically
Jochen,
A project is accepted into the Incubator on the hopes that it WILL become an
ASF project. However, it still needs to meet certain critera (the exit
criteria). Those criteria should include having a healthy Community, which
helps to ensure its long term survival; and having all legal issu
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>
>> i think the point is that a podling is *not* part of the
>> asf, and is therefore not entitled to distribute something
>> with the asf's name on it. if the podling graduates, i don't
>> see any bar to whatever packages were built during incubation
>> being retitled as
Berin:
Have just gone thought the changes. I like the notion of the
"Sponsoring Entity" at this addresses the entity into which a prodling
is destined. Perhaps we could change the name to "Parent". I.e. if a
cadidate aims to be top-level, its parent would be the Board. If the
project aims t
> I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor. From what
> I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd. If the Sponsor
> wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the responsibilities
I disagree. One problem is that the terms seem to be getting overloaded.
But
> no good, alas; i'll be on the road driving to another town at that point.
> i *should* be back within a couple of hours, though. :-/
Ken,
please find the #kannel IRC channel log of the debate at
http://www.kannel.org/irc-sessions/
from last friday and today.
People have raised a couple o
> I have no problem with protocol-centric projects, and no problem with
> language-centric projects, but I do have a problem with protocol-centric
> projects that assume one implementation language is "best".
OK, I've seen enough language wars to understand your a priori concern.
Mind you, not eve
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
i disagree. the lack of a release snapshot doesn't seem to
interfere with sourceforge projects attracting people, and
i don't see that it would be any different here.
The lack of release snapshots on sf.net is (IMO) the best indicator, that
the project isn't maintai
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Noel, if you don't mind I'll also answer this.
Someone asking my permission to respond to an open comment on a public list
actually makes me a bit uncomfortable. Makes me wonder why anyone they felt
the need to ask. The fact that you are a member of the overseeing PM
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 08:39:20 -0400
(Subject: Re: roles and responsibilities)
Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2) isn't the incubation more an oversight group, a task force, then a
> > project?
> you seem to be harking back to 'projects produce code'. i disagree with
> tha
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 14:15 Europe/Rome, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
You feel excluded? Well, you do not need to be. Ask to become part of
this PMC, and you'll be surprised.
I don't feel excluded, Nicola. I feel unable to get my points across.
Admittedly, I could have used a more diplomatic
> That isn't the question I was asking. If someone else comes to Apache
> and says they want to start an LDAP server project using, for example,
> the Netscape code base (C++, I think) and another comes in wanting to
> establish a Python library for builtin calls to LDAP, should the ASF
> direct t
Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>
> Thanks, understood. In that case, I'd hold my argument, that the incubated
> project requires the ability for Releases in order to attract external users
> and build a community.
i disagree. the lack of a release snapshot doesn't seem to
interfere with sourceforge pr
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
...
Noel, if you don't mind I'll also answer this.
I agree with the principle (otherwise we get back to complete PMC
incubation independence and things blow up) but there are a few things
worth asking:
1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
me
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> 1) how do people get on the incubation PMC? any committer? only
> members? members and officials? everybody committer that previously has
> a record of helping incubation? just curious of what feelings are.
another good question. i agree with roy that anyone with
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
...
I have also very much de-emphasised the role of the sponsor. From what
I've seen, the key role post acceptance is the Shepherd. If the Sponsor
wishes to become the shepherd, then they retain the responsibilities,
otherwise they can move onto other things, having con
Peoples,
I have taken Stephen's page and attempted to integrate my understanding
of the concept of a Sponsoring Entity (e.g. XML project in the case of
XMLBeans).
This is all based on what I have seen during the course of the XMLBeans
incubation startup.
Apologies for term *Sponsoring Entity*
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 09:04 Europe/Rome, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
...
It has made issues that without it are simply ignored finally evident.
As for other issues, they are usually created by people complaining
here and not helping out.
I'm trying to help out indicat
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 09:04 Europe/Rome, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
The Chair of that PMC is the sponsor.
Really? I thought I was the sponsor.
Really? Didn's see you there much :-P
Which might also show how many private emails you might have missed?
Incubation is more a social operation tha
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> I have no problem with protocol-centric projects, and no problem with
> language-centric projects, but I do have a problem with protocol-centric
> projects that assume one implementation language is "best". Those types
> of projects create failure conditions that are ve
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Steven, sorry that I probably gave the wrong impression that you were
not involved, as you were.
No problem. Just wanted to put things straight. No hard feelings.
But you are not the Cocoon PMC, and I wanted
to point out that there was not much incolvment of the PMC as
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 01:26 Europe/Rome, Stephen McConnell wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
I said nothing about documentation, process, policy or accountability.
LOL
We certainly agree on this!
:-)
Agree about what? that I didn't say what you previously accused me of
having said?
This
On Monday, Sep 22, 2003, at 04:37 Europe/Rome, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Berin,
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?IncubatorMussings
Had a read. Great stuff :>.
At a quick glance, I see some things to change.
- there has not been stated a minimum community size to start
- it has been e
Phil Steitz wrote:
>
> I would humbly suggest that there is no harm in public discussion of
> incubator project proposals, understanding that the voting is private,
> by the PMC. Public discussion and nonbinding statements of
> support/non-support by non-PMC members could provide valuable
> in
Java is simply the chosen implementation platform for an RFC-compliant
server, just as C/APR is the implementation platform for the HTTP
server.
The wire-level protocol is RFC based and language neutral. The
project can
host other languages when appropriate, and would certainly provide
informati
Jim Jagielski wrote:
--
Andrew C. Oliver|acoliverapache.org |2003-08-22| 144|
Nicola Ken Barozzi |nicolakenapache.org|2003-09-19| 142|
Rodent of Unusual Si|coarapache.org |2003-09-21| 141|
Greg Stein |gsteinapach
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
...
Just to clarify - my issue is not too many or to
few rules, but that I'd like to see the rules
clearly documented so that I can ensure that
anything I am involved in incubating is doing what
it needs to do.
Oh, and to clarify from my side, you are helping us on the is
> Facts show us that PMCs left on their own do not overlook
> an incubation process correctly.
Clearly there are lines of communication that can be improved, as well as
roles and responsibilities to clarify. Incubation can be collaborative.
And the behavior that the podling sees between its paren
> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > I don't understand: what is this incubator doing anyway if all the
> > projects are incubated somewhere else?
>
> 1 - votes the projects into Apache after check that all the nitty-gritty
> stuff has been taken care of
Or does it recommend
Phil,
The LDAPd server in its present state could eventually support X.500 over
TCP/IP. In fact both X.500 and LDAP seem to be coming closer every day
since X.500 made the jump to using TCP/IP. I think the two will eventually
come back together. For the time being when we speak about a director
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
On Friday, Sep 19, 2003, at 14:05 Europe/Rome, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
...
the members came to consensus agreeing that project umbrellas are a
pain in the ass and a PMC should be as close as possible to the code
it develops, as to increase the
Sam Ruby wrote:
Davanum Srinivas is an ASF member and an ASF officer and chair of the
web services PMC. He is very interested in the incubation of the WSRP4J
and Pluto podlings.
I would like to see him included in the incubator PMC. Let me start
things off with my: +1.
Sam, I sent a mail titl
81 matches
Mail list logo
