Jorg Heymans dijo:
> Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
>> Jorg Heymans wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> First of all, thanks Luigi for bringing up something that has been on
>>> my mind for a long time! Cocoon's patch queue is nothing to be proud
>>> of to be honest, both in size and age.
>>>
>>> The only way to get an over
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
> Even if I'm more inline with Stefano's way of seeing things and have a
> natural tendency of letting things self-organizing, I also agree that
> having clear rules may ease our job, and fostering work on them is part
> of my PMC chair job.
It is the job of the whole P
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
Jorg Heymans wrote:
First of all, thanks Luigi for bringing up something that has been on
my mind for a long time! Cocoon's patch queue is nothing to be proud
of to be honest, both in size and age.
The only way to get an overworked committer off the hook in the long
run
May I ask what is the current procedure to become a commiter? From what
I've seen on the list the only way to become one is to be introduced by
another commiter? Is that right?
Yepp!
Contribution in discussions, code and/or documentation
qualify for a nomination. If people are active and
demonstr
Leszek Gawron said:
>
> May I ask what is the current procedure to become a commiter? From what
> I've seen on the list the only way to become one is to be introduced by
> another commiter? Is that right?
"With great power comes great responsibility"
or
"From those to whom much is given, much
Leszek Gawron wrote:
May I ask what is the current procedure to become a commiter? From what
I've seen on the list the only way to become one is to be introduced by
another commiter? Is that right?
Yes. Read more here
http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#meritocracy
Vadim
Luigi Bai wrote:
And the issue of "poor overworked committers" can be partially
alleviated by increasing the number of people deputized to commit bug
fixes. This will likely get even easier to administer when "real blocks"
become a reality; then individuals can be deputized "per block" (they
ca
Jorg Heymans wrote:
First of all, thanks Luigi for bringing up something that has been on my
mind for a long time! Cocoon's patch queue is nothing to be proud of to
be honest, both in size and age.
The only way to get an overworked committer off the hook in the long run
is to guide and nurture
On 27 Oct 2004, at 10:21, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
[1]
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/*checkout*/forrest/trunk/src/
documentation/content/xdocs/bylaws.xml
[2] http://wiki.apache.org/excalibur/Bylaws
This is where mostly me and David left it at:
http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/cocoon/site/src
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
David Crossley wrote:
So when a real, potentially damaging, issue arises we will have no
way to sensibly handle it.
It has been working fine so far and I see no evidence of things changing.
Even if I'm more inline with Stefano's way of seeing things and have a
natural t
Luigi Bai wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2004, David Crossley wrote:
Luigi Bai wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Maybe it is more precise to say "When shit works /mostly/ well...".
The
presence of a large number of outstanding Bugzilla issues,
especially ones
with [PATCH]es attached, implies that things wo
David Crossley wrote:
So when a real, potentially damaging, issue arises
we will have no way to sensibly handle it.
It has been working fine so far and I see no evidence of things changing.
--
Stefano.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> >
> > I see David's point though, using [VOTE] in subject (and [PROPOSAL]
> > maybe) helps in not missing stuff that's happening.
> >
> > But I like our +1 way of saying "me? I like it" even if outside of a
> > vote - it's part of our "slan
On Tue, 27 Oct 2004, David Crossley wrote:
Luigi Bai wrote:
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Maybe it is more precise to say "When shit works /mostly/ well...". The
presence of a large number of outstanding Bugzilla issues, especially ones
with [PATCH]es attached, implies that things work well for committe
Luigi Bai wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> >>
> >> Maybe it is more precise to say "When shit works /mostly/ well...". The
> >> presence of a large number of outstanding Bugzilla issues, especially ones
> >> with [PATCH]es attached, implies that things work well for committers, less
> >> wel
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Luigi Bai wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
forth: some of us spend a great amount of their life trying to come up
with strategies that avoid the use of those rules, and understand how
complex groups form and dissolve, how innovatio
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
...
If you have ideas on how to make it better, we are wide open to
suggestions.
Making the Subject match the content of this thread would be a good start.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussion
Luigi Bai wrote:
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
forth: some of us spend a great amount of their life trying to come up
with strategies that avoid the use of those rules, and understand how
complex groups form and dissolve, how innovation happens and how
community fractures can be
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
forth: some of us spend a great amount of their life trying to come up with
strategies that avoid the use of those rules, and understand how complex
groups form and dissolve, how innovation happens and how community fractures
can be avoided. When shi
I'm trying really really really hard not to reply to this but I can't.
Frédéric Glorieux wrote:
For computing, you are really incredible guys, but for politics, I'm
sorry to say that but you are "reinventing the wheel". Rules are not
"bureaucratic" but the only way to have a stable democracy, whi
One trouble is that Cocoon does not yet have any
project guidelines. Another trouble is that people
seem to use the +1 thing even when a vote is not
happening. The proposal phase for the discussion,
then the vote phase for the decision, is an Apache
way to get things done efficiently. We forget th
Torsten Curdt wrote:
+1
...I guess noone really used it anyway
--
Torsten
I really really really tried when I first moved to cocoon :(
JD
+1
...I guess noone really used it anyway
--
Torsten
Le 26 oct. 04, à 18:19, Sylvain Wallez a écrit :
...Yup. You can even have a T-Shirt with it:
http://www.cafepress.com/meepzor.10338499
Wow. +1 ;-)
-Bertrand
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
Le 26 oct. 04, à 17:41, Stefano Mazzocchi a écrit :
..Bah, burocrats.
;-)
I see David's point though, using [VOTE] in subject (and [PROPOSAL]
maybe) helps in not missing stuff that's happening.
But I like our +1 way of saying "me? I like it" even if outside of a
vote
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
Le 26 oct. 04, à 17:41, Stefano Mazzocchi a écrit :
..Bah, burocrats.
;-)
I see David's point though, using [VOTE] in subject (and [PROPOSAL]
maybe) helps in not missing stuff that's happening.
But I like our +1 way of saying "me? I like it" even if outside of a
vote
On 26.10.2004 15:11, Antonio Gallardo wrote:
Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1.X releases
and then dump it in 2.2. If people want to "use" PHP with Cocoon, the
best solution is to just use a FileGenerator and an http:// URL.
Seems we are alredy voting o
Le 26 oct. 04, à 17:41, Stefano Mazzocchi a écrit :
..Bah, burocrats.
;-)
I see David's point though, using [VOTE] in subject (and [PROPOSAL]
maybe) helps in not missing stuff that's happening.
But I like our +1 way of saying "me? I like it" even if outside of a
vote - it's part of our "slang" I
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Oh, c'mon, we have a gazillion +1 and no -1, go ahead and deprecate it.
It's not like we can't reverse the thing if a -1 shows up.
Bah, burocrats.
Sir, I'll have to ask you to file a formal complaint, and you can expect
a response in 6 to 8 weeks. :) :)
Tony
Tony Collen wrote:
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
+1, I agree with the formal vote but if you start it by counting all
the +1s here we don't need to vote again.
Alright, well I guess I phrased my message as a pseudo-vote, so the
confusion is my fault!
Anyway, I'l count the existing votes as if it w
David Crossley wrote:
No, it is not bureaucratic. It is about efficiency.
That's what bureaucrats always say ;-)
--
Stefano.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
+1, I agree with the formal vote but if you start it by counting all the
+1s here we don't need to vote again.
Alright, well I guess I phrased my message as a pseudo-vote, so the
confusion is my fault!
Anyway, I'l count the existing votes as if it were an official vote
Tony Collen dijo:
> Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1.X releases
> and then dump it in 2.2. If people want to "use" PHP with Cocoon, the
> best solution is to just use a FileGenerator and an http:// URL.
Seems we are alredy voting on that. Here is
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> >
> >>Reinhard Poetz a écrit :
> >>
> >>>Tony Collen wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>...Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1
Tony Collen wrote:
...
Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1.X releases
and then dump it in 2.2. If people want to "use" PHP with Cocoon, the
best solution is to just use a FileGenerator and an http:// URL.
I had written a similar mail a loong time ago, so
David Crossley wrote:
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
Reinhard Poetz a écrit :
Tony Collen wrote:
...Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1.X
releases and then dump it in 2.2. If people want to "use" PHP with
Cocoon, the best solution is to just use a FileGenerat
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Reinhard Poetz a écrit :
>
> > Tony Collen wrote:
> >> ...Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1.X
> >> releases and then dump it in 2.2. If people want to "use" PHP with
> >> Cocoon, t
Le 26 oct. 04, à 11:33, Reinhard Poetz a écrit :
Tony Collen wrote:
...Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1.X
releases and then dump it in 2.2. If people want to "use" PHP with
Cocoon, the best solution is to just use a FileGenerator and an
http:// URL..
xml-cocoon-users&w=2&r=1&s=phpgenerator&q=b
Here's a good example of recent attempt of using the PHP Servlet:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-users&m=107340894710274&w=2
It's my personal opinion that we'll never see a good PHP servlet,
especially since it
xml-cocoon-users&w=2&r=1&s=phpgenerator&q=b
Here's a good example of recent attempt of using the PHP Servlet:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-users&m=107340894710274&w=2
It's my personal opinion that we'll never see a good PHP servlet,
especially since it
On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Tony Collen wrote:
Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1.X releases and
then dump it in 2.2. If people want to "use" PHP with Cocoon, the best
solution is to just use a FileGenerator and an http:// URL.
+1
--
Giacomo Pati
Otego AG, Swi
xml-cocoon-users&w=2&r=1&s=phpgenerator&q=b
Here's a good example of recent attempt of using the PHP Servlet:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-users&m=107340894710274&w=2
It's my personal opinion that we'll never see a good PHP servlet,
especially since it
Tony Collen wrote:
>
> Let's deprecate the PHP block for the remainder of our 2.1.X
> releases and then dump it in 2.2. If people want to "use"
> PHP with Cocoon, the best solution is to just use a
> FileGenerator and an http:// URL.
>
+1
Carsten
p;r=1&s=phpgenerator&q=b
Here's a good example of recent attempt of using the PHP Servlet:
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-users&m=107340894710274&w=2
It's my personal opinion that we'll never see a good PHP servlet,
especially since it's been &
44 matches
Mail list logo
