;>>> Ahhh... I see no that's just code for I don't have time, but these
>> folks have shown interest ;-)
>>>> I'm happy to help make sure we hit this deadline, but I'm not driving
>> it.
>>>> Ross
>>>>
>>>> -Original Message
7;s just code for I don't have time, but these
> folks have shown interest ;-)
> >>
> >> I'm happy to help make sure we hit this deadline, but I'm not driving
> it.
> >>
> >> Ross
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-
> >
s
>> have shown interest ;-)
>>
>> I'm happy to help make sure we hit this deadline, but I'm not driving it.
>>
>> Ross
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ulrich Stärk [mailto:u...@spielviel.de]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 12,
On 13 April 2015 at 20:42, Roger and Beth Whitcomb <
rogerandb...@rbwhitcomb.com> wrote:
> Pivot is using Apache Extras basically for "source-code for projects that
> can't..." because of licensing issues. So, my feeling is we are different
> than AOO.
>
AOO uses apache-extra, for libraries that
Pivot is using Apache Extras basically for "source-code for projects
that can't..." because of licensing issues. So, my feeling is we are
different than AOO.
~Roger Whitcomb
Apache Pivot PMC Chair
On 4/13/15 6:48 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
How much of Apache Extras is "binary dumping gro
How much of Apache Extras is "binary dumping ground" (as used by OO
builds), and how much is just "source-code for projects that
can't/won't quite fit into ASF" (e.g. for licensing reasons or lack of
community)?
As long as you have the source code, then you can attach binaries to
tagged releases i
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 7:17 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> Do please consider that all the world cannot use Maven just as all the
> world is not written in Java.
>
Lately, it appears that the fraction of the world that can use maven or a
cache of maven is pretty large. Even our very finicky financi
On 19.03.2015 06:22, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> +1 for GitHub - as Apache Extras are easily mini-communities of one
> or two people and not as clear way in to contribute.
>
>
> GitHub should seriously be considered. Making an apache-extras
> organization there should be straight forward.
GitHub
t code for I don't have time, but these folks
>>>> have shown interest ;-)
>>>>
>>>> I'm happy to help make sure we hit this deadline, but I'm not driving it.
>>>>
>>>> Ross
>>>>
>>>> -Original Message--
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:22 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> +1 for GitHub - as Apache Extras are easily mini-communities of one
> or two people and not as clear way in to contribute.
>
>
> GitHub should seriously be considered. Making an apache-extras
> organization there should be straight for
re we hit this deadline, but I'm not driving it.
>>>
>>> Ross
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Ulrich Stärk [mailto:u...@spielviel.de]
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 1:50 PM
>>> To: dev@community.apache.org
;
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 3:50 PM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Cc: Apache Board
> Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
>
> Yes, Roberto offered to have SF host an Apache Neig
rg
Cc: Apache Board
Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
Yes, Roberto offered to have SF host an Apache Neighborhood (??) for us, to
replace Apache-Extras. I put he and David in touch, since David was best to
know what exactly we needed and what the division of labor should be.
If
Yes, Roberto offered to have SF host an Apache Neighborhood (??)
for us, to replace Apache-Extras. I put he and David in touch,
since David was best to know what exactly we needed and what
the division of labor should be.
If David lacks the time to follow-up, I very much volunteer to
take this up
--Original Message-
From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 3:16 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
Infra doesn't use extras, or even administer it, so it seems strange for us to
have a stake in decision making. We ar
rch 12, 2015 3:06 PM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
>
> On 12 March 2015 at 22:55, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> > On 12/03/2015 Roger and Beth Whitcomb wrote:
> >
> >> I was involved at one point on behalf of Pivot
[mailto:da...@gnsa.us ]
> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 2:37 PM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
>
> It is my understanding that moving to SF from Google Code is a ComDev
> decision. I have interacted with SF and then brought the PoC
lto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 3:06 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
On 12 March 2015 at 22:55, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 Roger and Beth Whitcomb wrote:
>
>> I was involved at one point on behalf of Piv
On 12 March 2015 at 22:55, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 12/03/2015 Roger and Beth Whitcomb wrote:
>
>> I was involved at one point on behalf of Pivot (where we have several
>> projects), and Andrea Pescetti on behalf of Open Office was also
>> involved (since they have a bunch of stuff there). Bu
On 12/03/2015 Roger and Beth Whitcomb wrote:
I was involved at one point on behalf of Pivot (where we have several
projects), and Andrea Pescetti on behalf of Open Office was also
involved (since they have a bunch of stuff there). But things have gone
quiet for about 2 months. There was a secon
, 2015 2:37 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
It is my understanding that moving to SF from Google Code is a ComDev decision.
I have interacted with SF and then brought the PoCs they've done here, but
AFAIK, no decision has been made.
--David
O
gt; I'm happy to help make sure we hit this deadline, but I'm not driving it.
>>
>> Ross
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Ulrich Stärk [mailto:u...@spielviel.de]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 1:50 PM
>> To: dev@community.apache.org
>> Subjec
]
> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 1:50 PM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
>
> *Really* moving board@ to BCC ;)
>
> You said you put people in contact with each other so I was under the
> impression you were actively part of a group driv
eadline, but I'm not driving it.
Ross
-Original Message-
From: Ulrich Stärk [mailto:u...@spielviel.de]
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 1:50 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
*Really* moving board@ to BCC ;)
You said you put people in con
12, 2015 1:50 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
*Really* moving board@ to BCC ;)
You said you put people in contact with each other so I was under the
impression you were actively part of a group driving this.
Jim, do you have any updates on the cur
Ulrich Stärk [mailto:u...@spielviel.de]
> Sent: Thursday, March 12,
> 2015 1:36 PM To: dev@community.apache.org Cc: bo...@apache.org Subject: Re:
> Google Code shutting
> down Jan 2016
>
> We reported about apache extras in September and November and both times we
> were to
PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Cc: bo...@apache.org
Subject: Re: Google Code shutting down Jan 2016
We reported about apache extras in September and November and both times we
were told that Jim, Ross, David and Roberto were working on it. Some time in
October David asked for feedback on a proof
We reported about apache extras in September and November and both times we
were told that Jim,
Ross, David and Roberto were working on it. Some time in October David asked
for feedback on a proof
of concept, no news since then.
Can you shed some light on who is driving this atm?
Cheers,
Uli
Today Google announced that Google Code will be shutting down Jan 25, 2016.
We need to create a replacement for Apache-extras. Can we please make sure that
progress on this is reported in the ComDev board report each quarter.
I suggest the starting point should be to expand discussions with Sour
29 matches
Mail list logo
