I'll heartily second Paul's request, he's an integral part of the Jelly
team.
On 7/2/07, Paul Libbrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello Torsten,
indeed... I just wanted to avoid making noise there... but in any
case... I might be out of the two years window but I would wish to
keep jelly comm
Hello Torsten,
indeed... I just wanted to avoid making noise there... but in any
case... I might be out of the two years window but I would wish to
keep jelly committership, my ASF user-name is polx.
I would also favour splitting the lists so that commits and jira
mails come separately bu
Same here. I think 2 years is reasonable. They can ask to get commit
rights back at any time.
Henry, care to compile the list? Didn't you have some scripts for
that already? :)
cheers
--
Torsten
On 28.06.2007, at 10:14, Martin van den Bemt wrote:
I don't see a problem in doing the last 2
+1
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
I also would strongly prefer to use this opportunity to create a commits list
and an issues list.
Commons is big enough to need it, and it would increase the signal to noise on
the main list, especially when searching.
Stephen
- Original Message
From:
+1.
On 6/28/07, Stephen Colebourne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I also would strongly prefer to use this opportunity to create a commits list
and an issues list.
Commons is big enough to need it, and it would increase the signal to noise on
the main list, especially when searching.
Stephen
-
I also would strongly prefer to use this opportunity to create a commits list
and an issues list.
Commons is big enough to need it, and it would increase the signal to noise on
the main list, especially when searching.
Stephen
- Original Message
From: Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROT
I don't see a problem in doing the last 2 years, which kind of gives us a nice
clean "committer"
base and if we miss people, they simply need to ask for it.
Another options is just copy & pasting the jakarta committers block from
asf-authorization, that way
you know everyone who has access, still
Agree with Niall..
Archives are pretty much unusable with commits messages and jira issues..
Mvgr,
Martin
Niall Pemberton wrote:
> On 6/27/07, Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> #===
>> [1] Mailing List
>>
>> (i) addresses
>>
>> I. [EMAIL PROT
On 6/27/07, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/28/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/27/07, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 6/28/07, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 6/27/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Personally
On 6/27/07, Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
#===
[1] Mailing List
(i) addresses
I. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Henri Yandell<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Mario Ivank
On 6/28/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/27/07, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/28/07, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 6/27/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Personally, my vote would be to say:
> > >
> > > commons=committers
> >
>
On 6/27/07, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/28/07, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/27/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Personally, my vote would be to say:
> >
> > commons=committers
>
> You mean all apache committers? I agree that we should continue
On 6/28/07, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/27/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Personally, my vote would be to say:
>
> commons=committers
You mean all apache committers? I agree that we should continue the
tradition of granting commons karma to any committer who asks
On 6/27/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Personally, my vote would be to say:
commons=committers
You mean all apache committers? I agree that we should continue the
tradition of granting commons karma to any committer who asks for it.
I don't know much about how this works in svn
Personally, my vote would be to say:
commons=committers
Others tend to disagree :)
[though in practice you have to list each committer group
alphabetically as groups aren't nested in the svn auth file]
Hen
On 6/27/07, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Does anything need to be done to the SVN a
Does anything need to be done to the SVN authorization file?
There is currently a commons group in it, but it contains only
commons=gstein,jerenkrantz
Presumably all the new commons committers are currently in the jakarta group.
No point removing them (at least at present), but do they need to
I've prepared the TODO for the infrastructure work. Please cross-
check and give feedback. I am not sure how we want to handle the wiki
migration.
cheers
--
The board has agreed to create the Commons project. (Please note that
there has been a previous commons TLP)
To aid in the process,
17 matches
Mail list logo
