+1
Regards
JB
On 04/09/2015 03:06 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to become
Although I do not have a problem with naming it ActiveMQ 6, given al the
discussion I agree this is the best option going forward, so +1
(non-binding).
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Ninad Sheth ninadexpert7...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1
On Apr 11, 2015 10:57 PM, Bruce Snyder bruce.sny...@gmail.com
+1
Bruce
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com
wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
+1
On Apr 11, 2015 10:57 PM, Bruce Snyder bruce.sny...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
Bruce
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 7:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com
wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as
+1
-dain
On Apr 9, 2015, at 6:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to become ActiveMQ 6. We can figure out what the
code name should be
+1
david jencks
On Apr 9, 2015, at 9:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of
+1
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com
wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code
+1
Hiram Chirino mailto:hi...@hiramchirino.com
9 April 2015 14:06
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to
+1
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code
+1
- Original Message -
From: Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com
To: ActiveMQ-Developers dev@activemq.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2015 8:06:16 AM
Subject: [VOTE] HornetQ Code Donation should use a codename
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name
+1
On Apr 9, 2015 9:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not
+1
On 9 Apr 2015 14:06, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready
On 04/09/2015 09:06 AM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to become ActiveMQ 6.
+1
On 09/04/15 14:06, Hiram Chirino wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as HornetQ
which adds to the Trademark confusions. Also the current state of the
code is not ready to become ActiveMQ 6. We
+1
On Apr 9, 2015 7:25 AM, Clebert Suconic clebert.suco...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Hiram Chirino hi...@hiramchirino.com
wrote:
Lots of confusion has occurred since we did not use a code name for
the code donation from the start. Everyone refers to it as
16 matches
Mail list logo