Apache Geronimo report for October

D'oh! I forgot to CC the dev list.. -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" --- Begin Message --- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Below is the belated Geroni

Re: Java EE 5.0

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Jencks wrote: > > After reading ken's comments I agree that keeping it in the sandbox > carries an unwanted implication that it's not ready for prime time. I think that's pitching it a bit strongly, depending on what you mean by 'prime time.'

Re: Java EE 5.0

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Jencks wrote: > > I think this is a bad idea: it breaks the model that anything in > server/** is a complete server and provides no advantage I can see to > working in the sandbox. I am strongly against this. One advantage is that it forma

Re: Java EE 5.0

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > Do you mean that we will have two active development trees? Sounds like it. > If so, I'm against that (-1). We have tried that in the past and it > has never worked out for us. We split our developers when we need > focus th

Re: STATUS emails

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rodent of Unusual Size wrote: > > Didn't get updated when STATUS was moved. Fixed, should > arrive any time now (as soon as it gets moderated through > from the new sender). In fact, there may be a few in the moment due to a ty

Re: STATUS emails

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Blevins wrote: > Is it possible we can get the status emails back in place? The last > one we got seemed to be a good conversation starter. Didn't get updated when STATUS was moved. Fixed, should arrive any time now (as soon as it gets moder

Re: ApacheCon Attendance

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Hogstrom wrote: > Who is planning on being at ApacheCon in Austin? I'll be there. - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo Development Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kevan Miller wrote: > > Understand your concerns about communication occurring on the mailing > lists. I think these can be addressed in the proposals. I don't think > they fundamentally change the nature of the proposals. Do you agree? If > we're unc

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo Development Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sachin Patel wrote: > >> -1 on that last sentence. You don't hold discussions in JIRA.. > > Why? This to me is the ideal place to append comments. If a contributer > opened a JIRA and attached a patch, I'd expect comments on the patch to > be appen

Re: [VOTE] Geronimo Development Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kevan Miller wrote: > > 1. Relaxed RTC > > Geronimo follows a Review-Then-Commit (RTC) model. Patches for new > function are provided by developers for review and comment by their > peers. Feedback is conducted through JIRA comments. - -1 on t

Re: [PROPOSAL] Modified RTC

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Hogstrom wrote: > > *** Begin Proposal *** > > Geronimo Development Process > > Geronimo follows a model similar to Review Then Commit (RTC). Trunk, active branches, maintenance branches, and all? Or how would you refine it across those? - --

Re: Geronimo Plugins project (Re: Where to develop plugins

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bruce Snyder wrote: > On 9/2/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Bruce Snyder wrote: >>> For me, Jeff just hit the nail on the head.

Re: Geronimo Plugins project (Re: Where to develop plugins

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bruce Snyder wrote: > On 9/2/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Bruce Snyder wrote: >>> For me, Jeff just hit the nail on the head.

Re: Geronimo Plugins project (Re: Where to develop plugins

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bruce Snyder wrote: > > For me, Jeff just hit the nail on the head. Remember that the Geronimo > kernel has no knowledge of J2EE. It was designed to be a bootstrap > kernel for any component (though I think that XBean is better suited > for the future

Re: Returning to Commit-Then-Review?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Aaron Mulder wrote: > > The proposal you shot down wasn't to carry on a conversation on the > Wiki, but to summarize the conversation so far so that people who > didn't catch all the e-mails could stay in the loop. FUD? Yes, FUD. Because I didn't s

Re: Returning to Commit-Then-Review?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Um, crock o' FUD time, I see. Aaron Mulder wrote: > > Also, I'm not sure why the PMC Chair continues to attempt to control > and direct communications, Control? No. Direct? Where they don't seem to be happening productively, absolutely. > postin

Re: Returning to Commit-Then-Review?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rodent of Unusual Size wrote: > Jacek Laskowski wrote: >> Sure. I wish there were an editor or alike who would put our decisions >> from emails for others who only follow the project rarely, and can't >> cope with the flow.

Re: Returning to Commit-Then-Review?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > Sure. I wish there were an editor or alike who would put our decisions > from emails for others who only follow the project rarely, and can't > cope with the flow. Edit the STATUS file, which is getting autoposted. - -- #ke

Re: Returning to Commit-Then-Review?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > I think it's time to sum up the proposals and put them on the Wiki so > they are easily found and are in a readable form. No, at least not solely. They need to appear in email messages. - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagen

[STATUS] (geronimo) Wed Aug 23 23:48:53 2006

APACHE GERONIMO STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2006-08-17 21:07:33 -0400 (Thu, 17 Aug 2006) $] The current version of this file can be found at: * http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/trunk/STATUS Upcoming Releases: Geronimo 1.2 -- ge

Re: Returning to Commit-Then-Review?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > Just run across a question - let me think out loud. I think it's not > been answered yet. If only PMCers votes are binding and only when a > change gets 3 +1's binding votes (i.e. PMCers) the change may be > checked in, the

Re: Returning to Commit-Then-Review?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Blevins wrote: > > But the lazy consensus "cut off" you mention is something to think > about. That sort of model has been used before successfully. IIRC, it was as part of the 'controversial issues are RTC' part of CTR. In other words, rat

Returning to Commit-Then-Review?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Apache Geronimo has been operating mostly under the Review-Then-Commit model for a couple of months now, and I think the issues the change was intended to highlight have been .. well, highlighted. How do people feel about the idea of switching back to

[STATUS] (geronimo) Wed Aug 16 23:47:47 2006

APACHE GERONIMO STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2006-08-02 13:03:05 -0400 (Wed, 02 Aug 2006) $] The current version of this file can be found at: * http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/trunk/STATUS Current version in trunk: RELEASE SHOW

[STATUS] (geronimo) Wed Aug 2 23:48:09 2006

APACHE GERONIMO STATUS: -*-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2006-08-02 13:03:05 -0400 (Wed, 02 Aug 2006) $] The current version of this file can be found at: * http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/trunk/STATUS Current version in trunk: RELEASE SHOW

Re: Terminology and status

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > How will non-committers get their patches added to the status file? By a committer. - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Mille

Terminology and status

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 People have been referring to things requiring votes as 'RTCs'. Everyone *please* stop using RTC in this manner. RTC is a development model; what it and CTR are concerned with are patches. Please call them patches. Changes are patches; RTC and CTR

Additions to the Apache Geronimo project management ctte

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Last week the PMC voted to invite Jeff Genender and Matt Hogstrom to join it. Both have accepted the invitation and will be part of the team responsible for overseeing the healthy development of the project. Welcome, Matt & Jeff! - -- #kenP-)} K

Re: Need clarification on RTC... Yet again... was: [Proposal] Tracking the status of patches under RTC

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Jencks wrote: > > I do not think that Ken is providing sufficient communication to the > dev list. As matt pointed out, the original edict to the dev list > and ken's blog entry clearly and unequivocally stated that committer > votes were

Re: Need clarification on RTC... Yet again... was: [Proposal] Tracking the status of patches under RTC

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Hogstrom wrote: > I do not believe the +1's need to be from PMC members but other > committers. This is a snippet from Ken's personal web page: > > "Consequently, acting ex officio my VP/chair of Apache Geronimo role, > yesterday (Sunday, 21 May

Re: Dublin - Clustering get-together.... - Thurs aft/eve..

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jules Gosnell wrote: > > Matt - I don't think that the problem was with sponsorship, but rather > exclusion... (maybe I've misunderstood something?). Covalent are simply > providing a room and beer. The invitation is open to the entire > community

Re: Update on 1.1 Final2 Voting Status - Tally so far - Approximately 12 hours left

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 +0 - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG

Re: Request change to RTC Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > Let's take this as an example. As we haven't discussed it yet, it > seems to me that such a change requires 3x+1 from PMC members. So, > only when this vote (it should possibly be a separate vote with > 72-hour vote period t

Re: Request change to RTC Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Blevins wrote: > Is there a code quality issue in this community? Not necessarily. There *does* appear to be an issue with some people not wanting to abide by the requirements of the RTC model. - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweini

Re: Request change to RTC Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Aaron Mulder wrote: > On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> RTC means that you can't unilaterally and arbitrarily do things >> *without* discussion. Like, say, setting up a >> non-project-

Re: Request change to RTC Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 One way to compare CTR and RTC to each other: o With CTR, the focus is on getting things done. o With RTC, the focus is on getting things done *well* and doing it together. - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ A

Re: Request change to RTC Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Aaron Mulder wrote: > On 6/17/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> If that means things languish for weeks or months, then >> that's what it means. > > I don't think this is a good idea.

Re: Request change to RTC Process

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Kevan Miller wrote: > > In Ken's announcement of the change to the commit model, he stated > that a +1 to an RTC request means "I have applied this patch and > tested it and found it good". Although a relaxation of this > interpretation has been

Re: [RTC] ?? Review requested on intermediate patches for pluggable JACC

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 One thing that a number of the projects do is maintain a STATUS file with open issues, and have it send to the dev list once a week. This has been particularly useful for tracking the status of patches during RTC. When someone puts up a patch for rev

Re: Do we need a Plugin Repo at the ASF ?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Hogstrom wrote: > > If others feel that it needs to be at Apache *AND* are willing to set > it up then this is the time to speak up. If 'it' is singular, then having 'it' hosted at Apache means only Apache-licensed plugins can go into it. No GP

Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I agree with Jeff that 'whining' is an inappropriate typification of what has been happening here -- particularly since the discussion has been fed by specific requests. Aaron Mulder wrote: > > It's extremely difficult for me to understand how I am i

Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hiram Chirino wrote: > > On 6/12/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Aaron wrote: >>> Also, who has accused who of intimidation and how? >> I responded: >>> People who feel intimi

Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hiram Chirino wrote: > > Now the default link issue is something else. Can we point it by > default at some Apache machines by default? That would mean a) someone would need to set up and maintain that, and (more importantly) b) the default location

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 John Sisson wrote: > I agree that "merging" shouldn't require another RTC. So merging of > your m2 migration changes should be OK. It's not necessarily as clear-cut as that. Any change that's going into something provided as part of an Apache relea

Re: [Vote] 1.1-rc1 Now Available

Also mentioned in another thread: Two things: 1. Releases can't be vetoed; they use a consensual vote, not the '3 +1s and 0 -1s' mechanism. 2. Since a release bears the Apache name, releasing software is an official act of the Foundation, and as a consequence only members of the PMC hav

Re: [VOTE] Release XBean 2.4

Guillaume Nodet wrote: I have pushed XBean 2.4 binaries in a private repo for review. They are available at http://people.apache.org/~gnodet/xbean-2.4/m1/org.apache.xbean http://people.apache.org/~gnodet/xbean-2.4/m2/org/apa

Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager

Aaron Mulder wrote: Dims, Please don't imply that the PMC chair has sent an at-all useful message. Perhaps -- and evidently -- not useful to you, but it appears that others have caught on. (Why is the PMC different today than 4 weeks ago? I don't know -- you have made the first announcemen

Re: Frustrations of a Release Manager

Openness indeed. Aaron Mulder wrote: Yes, of course, that's a domain we got, because the project needs one Which project? Geronimo? The plugins effort? and it can't be at Apache (due to the LGPL issue). I've offered a number of times to give people accounts to help manage the site, and s

Call for Papers Opens for ApacheCon US 2006

If you're interested in possibly being a speaker at the ApacheCon conference in Austin Texas, US in October 2006, read the attached message. Note that the deadline for submissions is only a month away! -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opi

Re: A request to contribute

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mohammed Nour wrote: > > I am new to *Geronimo*, but I really want to help and contribute. I > consulted *dblevins *cause I am more interested in *OpenEJB*, and from > *Geronimo* dev-list I knew that Geronimo console needs people to work > on. So

Re: Creating a separate mailing list for XBean?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James Strachan wrote: > > So I was wondering; maybe we should create mailing lists for XBean and > then it becomes effectively a new subproject with its own identity. > > Given the slow release cycles of Geronimo, XBean could end up being > the cool

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rodent of Unusual Size wrote: > Dain Sundstrom wrote: >> Yes. I believe my answer was covered by your answer to Jan, "No, the >> experimental areas continue as they have. Only the main lines and >> branches of developm

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > Yes. I believe my answer was covered by your answer to Jan, "No, the > experimental areas continue as they have. Only the main lines and > branches of development are affected." > > I have an experimental branch in XBean t

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Matt Hogstrom wrote: > Just to clarify then. Daytrader has some final tweaks that are > required to get it out for 1.1 (adjusting some packaging and such). > I would consider this bug fixes and not rework (like adding a new > feature). I assume this

Re: Moving on from 1.1

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > -1 for the name - oldtrunk. > > I simply think it doesn't convey any meaning - oldtrunk or to put it > straight - it won't very soon. We all know what it means/contains now, > but what about the coming months? I think at so

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > Shouldn't *your* decision be voted as well or at least discussed here > openly, with the community to find out how they feel about our > cooperation/openness? Oh, and by all means this should be discussed. Among other aspe

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jan Bartel wrote: > > Do these rules also apply to stuff in the sandboxes? No, the experimental areas continue as they have. Only the main lines and branches of development are affected. - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ke

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jacek Laskowski wrote: > > Shouldn't *your* decision be voted as well or at least discussed here > openly, with the community to find out how they feel about our > cooperation/openness? What message are we sending out if *you* step > out and change th

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jason Dillon wrote: > What concerns about changes are you speaking of? I have so far seen > no such concerns. Can you please elaborate. By their very natures you wouldn't see them blatantly stated. Concerns that have been brought to me, from peop

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > Do revolution rules still apply or have they been suspended by fiat > also? Do you mean this? http://incubator.apache.org/learn/rules-for-revolutionaries.html - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.

Re: Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sachin Patel wrote: > Does this apply only to the "geronimo" code base or all subprojects > as well? (XBean, DevTools, GBuild, etc...)? It applies to all codebases which are part of the Geronimo project. It does not apply to things like the Service

Change to commit model for Apache Geronimo

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Due to concerns about how some changes have been getting made in the codebase, I am changing the commit model for the time being. Effective immediately, the development model for Apache Geronimo is changed from Commit-Then-Review to Review-Then-Commit

Re: Questions about www.geronimoplugins.com site

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [Apologoes for the apparent asynchronicity of my replies; my mail paths have been tortuous today.] Aaron Mulder wrote: > I have to disagree with putting up an ASF option as the default. Given that Maven has set a precedent here, I withdrawn my - -1 o

Re: Questions about www.geronimoplugins.com site

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jeff Genender wrote: > > I offer a +0 instead of a +1 as I still think there needs to be some > hammering out of the details...but I am ok with where we are at and the > direction we will be going. If Alan has rescinded his veto (I haven't seen that

Re: Questions about www.geronimoplugins.com site

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hernan Cunico wrote: > > Aaron, all the decisions should be made on the dev list, specially if > the discussion was over IRC, you know that. We should be discussing > about the plugins before implementing them, not after. I disagree. Under CTR, ever

Re: Questions about www.geronimoplugins.com site

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Aaron Mulder wrote: > On 5/2/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Please revert the look-elsewhere-by-default change until >> this is settled. > > If this is the decision, I can do it. Thank you. >

Re: Questions about www.geronimoplugins.com site

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Davanum Srinivas wrote: > +1 to "I do not think we should make the geronimoplugins site the > default and we need an ASF option as the default." Dims, Matt, are you volunteering to maintain such a ASF location and a persistent URL for it? - -- #ken

Re: Questions about www.geronimoplugins.com site

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Jencks wrote: > I haven't looked in detail at the current plugin site, but I don't > see how it is different in principle to the primary maven repo at > ibiblio, which is certainly not on apache hardware, as it distributes > oodles of non-a

Re: Questions about www.geronimoplugins.com site

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Aaron Mulder wrote: > I thought the point of this thread was to have a discussion? Please, > let's not have any more votes, let's have a discussion. Can you > describe your position? In the meantime, two people have invoked the 'review' part of com

Re: Questions about www.geronimoplugins.com site

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Aaron Mulder wrote: > On 5/1/06, John Sisson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I have a few questions: >> >> Was the plugin concept, site etc. discussed on the dev list? I haven't >> been able to find much at all. > > No, not really as such, more in l

Apache Geronimo quarterly report for 2006-04

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [resend; the first one didn't show up after 4 hours, assuming lost] This report covers the period from 2006-01-18 through 2006-04-18. Activity: - - Presentations about Apache Geronimo were given variously by Dain Sundstrom, Aaron Mulder, Matt

Apache Geronimo quarterly report for 2006-04

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 This report covers the period from 2006-01-18 through 2006-04-18. Activity: - - Presentations about Apache Geronimo were given variously by Dain Sundstrom, Aaron Mulder, Matt Hogstrom, and Jeff at JAOO and The Server Side Symposium. A lot of

Quarterly report to ASF coming up

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 April is one of the months in which the Geronimo project submits a report on the past quarter's activity. Please reply in this thread with any notable things that you think should be included -- even if they seem obvious to you. Particularly nasty bu

Re: Incubations

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I personally didn't find anything sensational about lichtner's > e-mail. I think he raises a valid point. If the primary goal of > Apache Geronimo is to develope a quality, open source J2EE offering Yes. > as a means o

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > > I don't see any rush here. I think your initial 'what do we need to work on in order to eventually graduate?' message got interpreted by some - -- probably myself included -- as a 'what are the last items to check off so we

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James Strachan wrote: > > What if folks involved in the project & on the Geronimo project don't > want it to be a TLP - at least not for a while yet? e.g. can't we > just use the Geronimo PMC until the time folks want/decide to start > to go TLP

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > > Just to make sure this was allowed, before pitching it to the > communities, I asked a few of the Board members at Euro OS con and > they said it was possible. I didn't want to get into a situation > where we do all of th

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 James Strachan wrote: > > What if folks involved in the project & on the Geronimo project don't > want it to be a TLP - at least not for a while yet? e.g. can't we > just use the Geronimo PMC until the time folks want/decide to start > to go TLP

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > Personally, I believe that ActiveMQ ought to be a TLP. Just to be clear, though, that's just a personal opinion at this time, and in no way a 'dis is how t'ings is gonna be' statement. Right? :-) > What makes a project wi

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > >> AFAIR, that was never *my* understanding. AFAIK, that has *never* >> been the way the incubator has worked. Every podling has supposed >> to have had a PPMC. If I'm wrong, please correct me; where did you >> (and evidentl

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > On the community side, we're still a bit shy of Mentors on ActiveMQ (James > is the only one, and we are looking for at least 3 per project) That's not actually a formal requirement though, correct? - -- #kenP-)} Ken C

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > > Official policy documents would be really nice, especially > considering they take a huge amount of time to develop and would > hopefully slow down the rate of change in the incubator. Yup. Policy still evolving, though

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > > When AMQ entered the incubator as a sponsored project from Geronimo, > the current understanding of incubator rules was that AMQ would > simply use the Geronimo pmc since the Geronimo pmc is expected to be > the home fo

Re: ActiveMQ Graduation From Incubator

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > > I understand this concern and agree with the solution, but we should > remember that AMQ entered the incubator before this was a rule, so I > for one didn't think it appled to them, since they are so close to > graduation.

Re: FW: Corrupted web page

I have not responded to him. Anyone who deals with this, please let him know? -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/ "Millennium hand and shrimp!" --- Begin Message ---   From: Peter Kohlberger [

Re: Yoko

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > > One question, do we need a PPMC? I think that we should start one > since this project has a very real possibility of becoming a TLP. It's not really a matter of choice. Incubating podlings have PPMCs regardles of where t

Re: PPMC for Yoko

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > > So, subprojects should have PMCs? No, there is one PMC per TLP. Podlings aren't TLPs and they aren't subprojects. They're their own discrete entities, with steering groups lasting as long as their podling status does. - -

Re: PPMC for Yoko

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Blevins wrote: > > So when they graduate as subprojects of geronimo, how does that > workout? Does the PPMC just get dissolved? It's handled on a case by case basis. If it's graduating to a TLP, the PPMC typically becomes the PMC of the new

Re: PPMC for Yoko

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > > Works for me. I don't remember ServiceMix and ActiveMQ having a podling > PMC. How is Yoko different? It's not; it's ActiveMQ and ServiceMix that are different. They should have PPMCs themselves. Their mentors should se

Re: [Vote] Make new site live

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hernan Cunico wrote: > I thought it would be a good idea to point directly to confluence > since in the new site we have a link to "library" (table on the left) > where you can find all the documentaion, books, articles, interviews, > etc. and a link t

PPMC for Yoko

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 All incubator podlings need to have a PPMC -- podling PMC. AFAICS, Yoko does not yet have one sorted out. So.. who should be on it? The podling mentors, of course, but whom else? All of the podling [initial] committers? - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar,

Re: [Vote] Make new site live

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bruce Snyder wrote: > > I notice that the Documentation tab links to the docs being hosted at > Atlassian. I'm OK with this, but how will this be received in the > scope of the Confluence battle? Until where it goes at Apache gets resolved, that's wh

Re: Ode Proposal

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bill Flood wrote: > The license is in the tarball and/or you can see it directly at > ftp://ftp.sybase.com/pub/incoming/wcss/bpe/SourceCodeEvaluationAgreement.txt > without dowloading the tarball. Thanks, Bill, Cory! - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanag

Re: Ode Proposal

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bill Flood wrote: > The source can be found here: ftp://ftp.sybase.com/pub/incoming/wcss/bpe/ - From one of the .java files: > * Confidential property of Sybase, Inc. > * > * Copyright 1987 - 2006. > * > * Sybase, Inc. All rights reserved. > * Unpub

Re: BPEL contribution from Sybase

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dain Sundstrom wrote: > > I think ServiceMix is the perfect home for a BPEL engine. Every JBI > implementation that I am aware of has and integrated orchestration > engine exposed via the BPEL specification. I am not worried about > "barriers" to

BPEL contribution from Sybase

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 After re-reading all the discussion threads and getting some technology education from people kind enough not to bash me on the bonce, my strong recommendation is that the Sybase contribution be made as a new podling proposal to the incubator. That's

Re: CORBA Incubation setup procedures

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alan D. Cabrera wrote: >> >>Anyone on general@incubator.apache.org have any comments >>to make on the proposal? Even just 'yeah, looks good >>to me' ? > > CRAP. CRAP. CRAP. CRAP. > > I could have sworn that I sent this to general@incubator.apache.o

Re: CORBA Incubation setup procedures

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > I think I need: > > * SVN > o http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/yoko > * Jira > * Mailing lists > o [EMAIL PROTECTED] > o [EMAIL PROTECTED] > o [EMAIL PROTECTED] Han

Covalent and Geronimo support

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 http://www.covalent.net/about/news/pressreleases.html?pressid=83 Let's put a link to that in the 'news' section on the project front page. - -- #kenP-)} Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Ken.Coar.Org/ Author, developer, opinionist ht

Re: Why Confluence cannot not be used as a wiki, and how it might be fixed

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Aaron Mulder wrote: > I'm not sure how to interpret this; are Ken/Noel suggesting that we > should stop using Confluence for the time being, or just that there > are more obstacles to get it fully implemented than were initially > expected? Probably t

  1   2   >