-1
On Tue, 31 May, 2022, 4:06 am Xi Chen,
wrote:
> +1 from me (committer, non-PMC)
>
> Thanks Tomoko for starting the discussion and organizing / leading this
> effort!
>
> Best,
> Zach
>
> On May 30, 2022, at 2:56 PM, Houston Putman wrote:
>
>
> +1 Approve (PMC)
>
> Thanks so much for doing
+1 from me (committer, non-PMC)
Thanks Tomoko for starting the discussion and organizing / leading this effort!
Best,
Zach
> On May 30, 2022, at 2:56 PM, Houston Putman wrote:
>
>
> +1 Approve (PMC)
>
> Thanks so much for doing all of the work for this Tomoko!
>
> - Houston
>
>> On Mon,
+1 Approve (PMC)
I'm not worried about reliance on GitHub as it is already approved by ASF. This
will lower the barrier to participation for new contributors.
- Jan
> 30. mai 2022 kl. 17:39 skrev Tomoko Uchida :
>
> Hi everyone!
>
> As we had previous discussion thread [1], I propose
+1 Approve (PMC)
Thanks so much for doing all of the work for this Tomoko!
- Houston
On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 5:38 PM David Smiley wrote:
> +1 Approve (PMC)
>
> ~ David Smiley
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 11:40 AM
+1 Approve (PMC)
~ David Smiley
Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 11:40 AM Tomoko Uchida
wrote:
> Hi everyone!
>
> As we had previous discussion thread [1], I propose migration to GitHub
> issue from Jira.
> It'd be technically
-1 (PMC, but not a veto)
Why ? As stated earlier, I'm not confortable with depending on GitHub for
governance. As long as Lucene is an "Apache" project, I'd like Apache
governance to determine who may or may not participate, not GitHub. I'd like
Apache to determine what is and is not
So 15% is a quorum for votes.
wunder
Walter Underwood
wun...@wunderwood.org
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
> On May 30, 2022, at 1:14 PM, Tomoko Uchida
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> thank you for participating for this!
>
> I may need to clarify the local rule I set.
> "15 votes" threshold
Hello, Tomoko.
+0
Thanks for moving it toward.
On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 6:40 PM Tomoko Uchida
wrote:
> Hi everyone!
>
> As we had previous discussion thread [1], I propose migration to GitHub
> issue from Jira.
> It'd be technically possible (see [2] for details) and I think it'd be
> good for
Hi,
thank you for participating for this!
I may need to clarify the local rule I set.
"15 votes" threshold means literally 15 votes, that includes approval(+1),
disapproval(-1), and no opinion(+0).
I don't mean we need 15 approvals or 15 disapprovals to make the dicision -
it could be too high
Hello everyone,
Not sure whether this email might help you, but let me share the VIVO
community experience with this issue. We have migrated JIRA issues
available at
https://vivo-project.atlassian.net/jira/software/c/projects/VIVO/issues/
to GitHub issues available at
+0
There’s other people who have thought about this much more than I have, but
I wouldn’t want my inaction to impact the increase 15 vote threshold.
Mike Drob
On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 10:40 AM Tomoko Uchida
wrote:
> Hi everyone!
>
> As we had previous discussion thread [1], I propose migration
Thank you Tomoko for starting the vote, although I didn't participate in
the last discussion but I'd love to see us moving towards the github issue.
So here's my +1 (committer, non-PMC)
BTW, by "the vote will be effective if it successfully gains more than 15%
of voters (>= 15) from committers",
Hi everyone!
As we had previous discussion thread [1], I propose migration to GitHub
issue from Jira.
It'd be technically possible (see [2] for details) and I think it'd be good
for the project - not only for welcoming new developers who are not
familiar with Jira, but also for improving the
I'm not sure what's going on here - the build itself passed but then a
timeout occurred:
BUILD SUCCESSFUL in 18m 14s
799 actionable tasks: 799 executed
Build timed out (after 179 minutes). Marking the build as aborted.
Build timed out (after 179 minutes). Marking the build as failed.
Build was
14 matches
Mail list logo
