On 12/21/05, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ted Leung wrote:
> >
> > On Dec 21, 2005, at 8:22 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> >
>
> >>
> >>> I think that the incubation process is setting an incredibly
> >>> low bar for access to the Apache brand name
> >>
> >> And we require disclaimers and
Ted Leung wrote:
On Dec 21, 2005, at 8:22 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I think that the incubation process is setting an incredibly
low bar for access to the Apache brand name
And we require disclaimers and clear notice that projects ARE in the
Incubator. Look at how the folks are complai
APACHE INCUBATOR PROJECT STATUS: -*-indented-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2005-11-24 00:30:24 -0500 (Thu, 24 Nov 2005) $]
Web site: http://Incubator.Apache.Org/
Wiki page: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/
[note: the Web site is the 'official' documentation; the wiki
put me down as a volunteer as well.
Original Message
Subject: Re: AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 09:08:04 -0500
From: Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Organization: Holsman.NET
Newsgroups: server.apache.incubator
Refere
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 19:47 -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 11:16:13AM -0800, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> > Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
> > the org.apache package?
>
> I would say "yes".
Big +1.
We of course cannot control standard AP
Craig L Russell wrote:
Excuse me, but don't we have a -1 on this vote thread already? Is the
idea to get Dain to change his vote by piling on more +1? Or have I
completely missed the Tao of the voting process in Apache?
I think perhaps you have, and are mixing two concepts...
Any PMC member (
+1
On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 11:49:14PM -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Please vote on the following:
>
> New mailing lists should be created under the
> @incubator.apache.org domain, just as all of
> the other project resources, e.g., the web
> site and SVN subtree.
>
> +1 from me.
>
>
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 11:16:13AM -0800, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project move to
> the org.apache package?
I would say "yes".
Consider five years down the road. The pre-Incubator life of a project
is a distant memory at that point. You're
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 12:57:59PM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
> >How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a project
> >in without approval of the incubator PMC? Just look at the raft of
> >projects being brought in via Geroni
Craig McClanahan wrote:
The Zimbra part of the proposal could, I suppose, be held to aim at that
goal. If you believe proposing an Eclipse-only tooling story (apparently to
the exlusion of at least some folks in the Eclipse Foundation :-) forwards
this goal, I would suggest taking this part of
On Dec 21, 2005, at 4:21 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
I'm still looking for an ISO 2000-able mechanism (repeatable,
documented, understandable) to migrate the email lists in the
incubator domain to the eventual TLP domain without losing threads,
context, etc. I see that Cocoon apparently has
On 12/21/05, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Craig McClanahan wrote:
> >
> >>From a software engineering viewpoint, focusing on a single tool
>
> Have you any other tools in mind? Bring them on!
Actually, I don't -- tooling-specific adaptations of generic technologies
seem best fitted to
On Dec 21, 2005, at 7:21 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Excuse me, but don't we have a -1 on this vote thread already? Is
the idea to get Dain to change his vote by piling on more +1? Or
have I completely missed the Tao of the voting process in Apache?
I thought that after a -1 the discussion
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> I see the Incubator as a gatekeeper almost.
See Roy's comments for an alternative view. As I understand his view, the
gatekeeper role is limited to projects leaving the Incubator, not entering.
> PMCs, in general, don't have an idea of the number of
> podlings within the
Ted Leung wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > > The merits of the particular proposal aside
> > We should always be judging the merits of each proposal.
> > Failing to do so might well be part of the problem.
> How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a project
> in without appr
On Dec 21, 2005, at 4:21 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Excuse me, but don't we have a -1 on this vote thread already? Is
the idea to get Dain to change his vote by piling on more +1? Or
have I completely missed the Tao of the voting process in Apache?
I thought that after a -1 the discussion s
Excuse me, but don't we have a -1 on this vote thread already? Is the idea to get Dain to change his vote by piling on more +1? Or have I completely missed the Tao of the voting process in Apache?I thought that after a -1 the discussion started again on the disagreements.I'm still looking for an IS
+1
Carsten
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Please vote on the following:
>
> New mailing lists should be created under the
> @incubator.apache.org domain, just as all of
> the other project resources, e.g., the web
> site and SVN subtree.
>
> +1 from me.
>
> --- Noel
>
> -Original M
Craig,
Sam addressed the social engineering viewpoint; I'd like to talk about the
software side:
> Craig McClanahan wrote:
>From a software engineering viewpoint, focusing on a single tool as a
>delivery vehicle will tend to bias architectural and implementation
>decisions towards what is easy to
Jesse Kuhnert wrote:
I chose tapestry as a web framework to use, and now contribute to, because I
thought I was making the best choice as far as design and overall
flexibility.(not to the detriment of other projects, just a personal
choice..) It's a shame that all of the other considerations ha
Though I'm still very new to ASF (recently added to tapestry) and the goings
on of how everything works I thought I would voice my tiny little opinion
into the fray as well.
It seems that, at least from what I can tell, choosing a javascript library
is a very personal sort of thing for most people
Similarily, storing bugs and
issues information could be stored in SVN repository, all in human
readable
text format. Yes, this takes a lot of time. Am I talking too
ideally?
:)
That's an interesting point. Issue tracking is another artifact
that is
not stored in SVN. Would it be useful
On Dec 21, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a project
in without approval of the incubator PMC? Just look at the raft of
projects being brought in via Geronimo and the WS PMC. There's
not a thing I can do, regardless of the meri
Craig McClanahan wrote:
From a software engineering viewpoint, focusing on a single tool
Have you any other tools in mind? Bring them on!
Once again, let me state that the goal is to seed a non-exclusive AJAX
community at the ASF.
In case it isn't perfectly clear: including Zimbra isn't
On 12/20/05, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> > Adam Peller wrote:
> [snip]
> > So the questions are:
> > - is the ASF the place for Eclipse extensions? I don't deny the ability
> > to _existing_ project to host their tooling, but this isn't the case
> here.
>
> As I
On Dec 21, 2005, at 8:22 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
The merits of the particular proposal aside
We should always be judging the merits of each proposal. Failing
to do so
might well be part of the problem.
How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a project
in without
On Dec 21, 2005, at 9:18 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
There is one thing that I think would be useful in
helping: That the Incubator PMC take an active role
in accepting new projects. Normally, if the Sponsor
says "Yes" a vote isn't even taken on the Incubator
side. I think
+1
On Dec 17, 2005, at 8:49 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Please vote on the following:
New mailing lists should be created under the
@incubator.apache.org domain, just as all of
the other project resources, e.g., the web
site and SVN subtree.
+1 from me.
--- Noel
-Original
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 18:02 +, James Strachan wrote:
> Dims could you please give us a bit of time to get ServiceMix's house
> in order first before we can start collaborating with other projects
> in earnest. Don't worry there will be collaboration.
+1!
Sanjiva.
--
On 21 Dec 2005, at 16:45, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Dan,
Then at least the proposal should be honest enough, not to name names.
If we don't know what ServiceMix's needs are, we cannot make sure the
design of Synapse will fit right with ServiceMix. No one is asking for
a code drop. Asking for inv
On 21 Dec 2005, at 14:42, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
James,
Incubation process is not set in stone. Just last week, we voted on
standardizing the mailing list names. So it is a mix of good
judgement, experience, consensus and rules. If you insist we can put
start a VOTE on [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think
In theory, the sponsor and mentors are doing that continuously.
geir
On Dec 21, 2005, at 10:51 AM, Rob Davies wrote:
I Also share these concerns - is there currently a process to have
continuous reviews throughout the entire life-cycle of all new and
existing projects - to ensure that eve
On Dec 21, 2005, at 12:18 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
There is one thing that I think would be useful in
helping: That the Incubator PMC take an active role
in accepting new projects. Normally, if the Sponsor
says "Yes" a vote isn't even taken on the Incubator
side. I thin
Let's put htis to the board today
-- dims
On 12/21/05, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> > There is one thing that I think would be useful in
> > helping: That the Incubator PMC take an active role
> > in accepting new projects. Normally, if the Sponsor
> > say
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> There is one thing that I think would be useful in
> helping: That the Incubator PMC take an active role
> in accepting new projects. Normally, if the Sponsor
> says "Yes" a vote isn't even taken on the Incubator
> side. I think that no matter what, unless overruled
> by the
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 11:38:52AM -0500, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> There is one thing that I think would be useful in
> helping: That the Incubator PMC take an active role
> in accepting new projects. Normally, if the Sponsor
> says "Yes" a vote isn't even taken on the Incubator
> side. I think that
Dan,
Then at least the proposal should be honest enough, not to name names.
If we don't know what ServiceMix's needs are, we cannot make sure the
design of Synapse will fit right with ServiceMix. No one is asking for
a code drop. Asking for involvement, i think that's what a community
means. getti
There is one thing that I think would be useful in
helping: That the Incubator PMC take an active role
in accepting new projects. Normally, if the Sponsor
says "Yes" a vote isn't even taken on the Incubator
side. I think that no matter what, unless overruled
by the board, the Incubator should vote
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
James,
Incubation process is not set in stone. Just last week, we voted on
standardizing the mailing list names. So it is a mix of good
judgement, experience, consensus and rules. If you insist we can put
start a VOTE on [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think you are part of that as w
> The merits of the particular proposal aside
We should always be judging the merits of each proposal. Failing to do so
might well be part of the problem.
> I think that the incubation process is setting an incredibly
> low bar for access to the Apache brand name
And we require disclaimers and
On 12/21/05, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The ASF isn't very good at "saying no", at least not very loudly. All our
> processes are geared at "saying yes" the right way and only if we feel
> comfortable. It seems we have something to learn here, and its a bit scary
> since this may ha
On 12/21/05, Ted Leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 20, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
> > Sam Ruby wrote:
> >> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >>
> >> As a general rule, the ASF doesn't go out "inviting", people
> >> within the ASF either start a new project, or projects come to us.
>
Has anyone found a free link on nameprotect.com?
Any insight on how incubating projects are suppose to clear trademarks now?
Do we need to get an actual account or something?
-Ted.
On 11/27/05, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there there still a free search page at nameprotect.com ?
I Also share these concerns - is there currently a process to have
continuous reviews throughout the entire life-cycle of all new and
existing projects - to ensure that everything under the 'apache'
brand is and will continue to be 'worthy' ?
Sorry if there's already a process in place -
Sam Ruby wrote:
> Raphaël Luta wrote:
>
>
> Overall, there is clearly strong interest in AJAX at the ASF, whether it
> be based on Zimbra or Dojo or whatever. Furthermore, the proposal needs
> to be revised, particularly to incorporate the people who have expressed
> an interest in participating
On 12/21/05, Ted Leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd love to have a good AJAX project here at Apache, but I'm not at
> all convinced that this is the best way to get it. I also talked to
> Alex Russell at Dojo about coming to the ASF (at this year's OSCON),
> and the overhead thing was alread
Folks,
Right now any PMC can automatically ok projects into incubator. How
about we change that rule? So that the only pmc that can approve a
proposal is the incubator PMC.
thanks,
dims
--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
---
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 01:50:28AM -0800, Ted Leung wrote:
> The merits of the particular proposal aside, I wanted to comment on
> this paragraph. This year at ApacheCon I was surprised to find that
> a number of people also feel that the ASF is growing far too
> quickly. I know that are
> Big assumption right there. I'll assert there's a reasonable
> chance I understand what's under the hood of the Eclipse
> platform quite well. IIRC I helped the Equinox people decide
> on what to put in there at some point...
Mea culpa. I was reacting to the comment about the "heavyweight
James,
Incubation process is not set in stone. Just last week, we voted on
standardizing the mailing list names. So it is a mix of good
judgement, experience, consensus and rules. If you insist we can put
start a VOTE on [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think you are part of that as well.
I did bring up issue
Ted Leung wrote:
On Dec 20, 2005, at 4:49 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
Corporations see the value of the brand name, that's why
they want to come here and are willing to put up with all our overhead.
I can't speak for all corporations, but I can speak to the proposals
that I have dealt with at
Raphaël Luta wrote:
Excellent post! It is nice to see somebody take the time to review the
actual proposal.
Overall, there is clearly strong interest in AJAX at the ASF, whether it
be based on Zimbra or Dojo or whatever. Furthermore, the proposal needs
to be revised, particularly to incorp
On Dec 21, 2005, at 4:50 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
On Dec 20, 2005, at 4:49 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
Personally, I am less than happy at seeing yet another large project
proposed from a corporate source (and IBM at that), along with a
dozen new
committers who have not earned their merit at the A
On 21 Dec 2005, at 13:02, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
James,
To be blunt, what is being done here? here's what i see as a casual
observer to the infra list.
- A bunch of projects are getting into Apache controlled by the same
set of people (ServiceMix/ActiveMQ/XBean/WADI)
Not really; see the comm
Sanjiva,
My bad. I just meant the AJAX toolkit portion of Zimbra.
-adam
Sanjiva
Weerawarana
2005/12/20, Ross Gardler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I always have imagined a web-based wiki application which stores its
> data in
> > a certain directory in SVN repository. Perhaps, we could create this
> kind
> > of backend extension for our existing CMS.
>
> The problem is that we are unlikely t
James,
To be blunt, what is being done here? here's what i see as a casual
observer to the infra list.
- A bunch of projects are getting into Apache controlled by the same
set of people (ServiceMix/ActiveMQ/XBean/WADI)
- Folks are getting completely unrelated projects into an umbrella
project "Ge
On Dec 21, 2005, at 6:40 AM, James Strachan wrote:
I think the package name change is currently not mandatory, but
perhaps
it should be.
I'm not so sure. There's already various stuff at Apache that
breaks this rule (SAX, DOM, JCP APIs such as stuff in geronimo-
spec, the SCA specif
Le 21 déc. 05, à 12:01, Leo Simons a écrit :
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:49:29PM -0800, Martin Cooper wrote:
Some comments:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:54:03AM +0100, Raphaël Luta wrote:
To me it raises all the possible incubation warning bells:
Same feelings here, I agree with Martin's a
On 21 Dec 2005, at 11:22, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On 12/21/05, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
On 21 Dec 2005, at 11:13, Leo Simons wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:59:11AM +, James Strachan wrote:
On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had
the
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 03:01 -0800, Leo Simons wrote:
>
> I have this urge to set up an "Under construction" sign on the incubator front
> page with a subtitle along the lines of "closed for renovations"...
+1, to give us a bit of soul searching time. We should put a cap on the
renovation time - 2
On 12/21/05, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> I wondered why this was mandatory; the purpose of the Java package
> name scheme is purely to avoid clashes; provided the .org domain name
> is owned (& we'd be happy to donate to Apache)
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:59:11AM +, James Strachan wrote:
> On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
> >took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had
> >the need to codify it...
>
> Yeah -
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:49:29PM -0800, Martin Cooper wrote:
> Some comments:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:54:03AM +0100, Rapha?l Luta wrote:
> To me it raises all the possible incubation warning bells:
Two convincing posts.
> In summary I see this proposal as a high risk, low value offer to t
On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never had
the need to codify it...
Yeah - I've never seen it actually written down anywhere & noticed
that the Rolle
Leo Simons wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:14:22PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
I'm quite puzzled by this proposal. As I understand it, its mainly about
a set of Eclipse plugins for Ajax applications and the Zimbra library
that, among other features, provides a set of SWT-like widgets.
On Dec 20, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
Sylvain Wallez wrote:
As a general rule, the ASF doesn't go out "inviting", people
within the ASF either start a new project, or projects come to us.
You're playing with words. Sure, there's no formal invitation
process
Martin Cooper wrote:
Some comments:
+1 to all your points.
Personally, I am less than happy at seeing yet another large project
proposed from a corporate source (and IBM at that), along with a dozen new
committers who have not earned their merit at the ASF as most committers
have. I feel
On Dec 21, 2005, at 12:56 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 22:10 -0800, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
However, after having been on the other side of this discussion during
the Synapse startup with the hullabaloo caused by ObjectWeb folks, I
have no patience for any kind of "this sp
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 04:49:29PM -0800, Martin Cooper wrote:
> Some comments:
>
> 1) This appears to be two proposals rolled into one. One is to incubate a
Yup. And Adam responded with the dreaded "subproject" word.
We determined a good while back that "umbrella" projects are bad. So
*starting
Martin Cooper wrote:
>
> Personally, I am less than happy at seeing yet another large project
> proposed from a corporate source (and IBM at that), along with a dozen new
> committers who have not earned their merit at the ASF as most committers
> have. I feel the ASF is losing its way, and becomi
On Dec 20, 2005, at 4:49 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
Personally, I am less than happy at seeing yet another large project
proposed from a corporate source (and IBM at that), along with a
dozen new
committers who have not earned their merit at the ASF as most
committers
have. I feel the ASF is
Hi all,
2005/12/18, David Crossley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Jean Anderson and Eddie O'Neil have volunteered to help redact our
> collected
> > wisdom into a coherent guide. Cliff Schmidt will contribute on the
> legal/IP
> > side. Henri Yandell has volunteered to revie
Mike, dude...
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 10:32:25PM -0500, Mike Milinkovich wrote:
> > Hmm. I think your email is more puzzling to me than the
> > original proposal :-) (A heavyweight java-based IDE for doing
> > what's essentially designed as "lightweight" stuff...
>
> It seems that your understa
75 matches
Mail list logo
