I'd love to be a part of the new PMC, so please count me in.
U
On Fri, 20 Mar 2020 at 17:12, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> With 5 people in favor of graduation, I'll start working on a draft for
> the board and IPMC. I'll adjust the proposed PMC to those on the PPMC
> that have expressed an interest i
+1 from me
Thanks for taking care of this.
U
On Mon, 11 Mar 2019 at 09:58, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> On 3/11/19 10:57 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> > This is a vote to release 0.11 with the changes we have pending. Not
> > much to say other than we should get these good changes out in t
Looks great!
On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 10:00, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
> I've been pondering on simplifying the logo we have, primarily for
> printing reasons - the current logo uses several shades that make it
> tricky to print, especially at low cost. I've made a new 3-color
> version; ht
+1 from me
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 at 10:04 Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Hullo folks, time for a release methinks!
>
> This is a vote on the artifacts collected from the tree in the 0.10
> branch with commit hash a8ea8a044996ba0aea08fe59156edb79cd6f9db8.
>
> The tree can be inspected at
>
> https://github.c
You still got my +1 on yaml.
I'm wondering about conflating all config files into a huge file. I also
wonder about many files, with no evident/apparent structure between files,
all scattered around. I suspect I'd lean towards
single-file-with-everything if I had to choose today.
U
On Wed, 21 Jun
IIUC, release versions are just a convention, just like release names and
such. In that sense, they are cheap.
I see two competing approaches:
> In Commons we create the tag using the RC number and name the files
with the final names but stored in a dist/dev/xxRNn folder.
>
> The votes contain th
Perhaps YAML isn't the format? I know next to no Lua and I'd personally
welcome being able to configure PM using a 3rd party format.
Having said this I also acknowledge that having config as code is good in
that you get compilation/interpreter errors if you made a mistake which is
very nice.
On T
Not just for not technically minded people (and techies too) but also
easier (possibly) to handle during automated deployments.
You got my +1 here.
U
On Mon, May 1, 2017, 12:35 Daniel Gruno wrote:
> While having a cup of coffee on the balcony, I got to thinking - would
> it make sense for us t
Would it be beneficial to have a virtualbox/docker thing for local testing?
If so, I think I have an old Vagrantfile I could polish and contribute.
U
On Fri, 11 Nov 2016 at 13:15 sebb wrote:
> On 11 November 2016 at 02:30, John D. Ament wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > would you want some puppet config t
> If not, any objections if I start doing so?
+1 from me
On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 at 21:09 sebb wrote:
> There are quite a few PRs that have been outstanding for a while now.
>
> Apart from PR56, there has been no pushback, so I think it would be
> good to start applying them to master.
>
> Does any
(or provide pull requests for it).
> > Updating a release branch should require additional actions.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/sebbASF/incubator-ponymail/blob/master/STATUS
> >
> > On 10 October 2016 at 12:33, Francesco Chicchiriccò
> wrote:
> >> On
If we decided to go with CTR (which I have no issues with), we should make
it explicit so that if anybody decided to auto-deploy master, it'd be clear
that master might not always be stable (in the sense of having had Rs on a
C).
Other than that, everything you suggest is more than sensible IMO.
+1
On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 at 15:25 Michelle Phung wrote:
> +1
>
> - Michelle
>
> > On Sep 1, 2016, at 10:09 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > As is evident, we haven't been getting a lot of traction on the JS dev
> > front from new people, and as such, I am going to bring up an old
+1 from me too
On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 at 08:35 Francesco Chicchiriccò
wrote:
> On 13/07/2016 13:46, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> > This is a vote to release Apache Pony Mail (Incubating) 0.9.RC2 as 0.9.
> > Some regressions were found by Gavin McDonald in RC1 which rendered the
> > importer useless. RC2 c
+1 from me
On Tue, 12 Jul 2016 at 10:17 Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Here's my own +1 and compliance summary:
>
> Archive digest file:Digest matches release candidate
> File type: File is a Gzip archive
> Extracting files from archive: Completed (153 elements extracted)
> Required fil
I suspect it depends on what's meant by lower level tests.
As for UI tests (ala selenium, etc.) I cannot be more +1 on this. However,
before this, we'd have to have the ability to spin up a PM instance with
data so that we could test these things. Nothing earth shattering there,
just time consumin
Github user ulises commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-ponymail/issues/60
I seem to be able to see that just fine?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
I'm fine with either as well.
On Wed, 1 Jun 2016 at 15:45 Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 06/01/2016 04:27 PM, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I see from [1] that we are supposed to use JIRA to track issues, but it
> > seems instead that we are working with GitHub issue tracker [2] - the
Yes, squashing in as many logical commits as necessary (sometimes a single
commit is not the answer) should be a must IMO.
I was referring more to this sort of situation:
1. PR has 4 commits
2. $person reviews, leaves 2 comments
3. before addressing, the author of the PR squashes everything into a
I like the workflow. I'd change/add a small thing though:
"Once the pull request is open and has been reviewed, address any review
comments and add the changes in new commits. This will make it easier for
the reviewer to focus only in the last changes without having to go again
through the entire
Github user ulises commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-ponymail/pull/56#issuecomment-222460841
squash and you get my ð
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Despite my shallow knowledge of CoffeeScript (and in lieu of my shallow
hate of JavaScript) I'd +1 such motion.
On Mon, 30 May 2016 at 08:06 Daniel Gruno wrote:
> I've been pondering this since I was forcibly introduced (by Ulises!) to
> CoffeeScript and found it to my likin
22 matches
Mail list logo
