Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to hear from the people
who ostensibly make up the fledgling Kabuki
community. But its development should have no reflection on any other
project. Oh yeah...Is there anybody from Kabuki that would respond?
The dead silence since Kabuki
Hola,
I am curious of how Apache Incubator works and whether there are rules
(written rules or generally understood rules without being written down)
governing issues like:
1. How a project can be accepted into Incubator;
2. How a project should be started once accepted (how soon, what
On 6/7/06, Paul Fremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will try to get a template based on Maven 1.x ready for ApacheCon
It probably makes far more sense to make that Maven 2.x. -- justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
+1
-Brian
On Jun 5, 2006, at 7:46 AM, James Strachan wrote:
We ended up recutting the binary of the 4.0 release of ActiveMQ to
address a few issues brought up in the Incubator PMC vote; I'd just
like to call another vote to explicitly approve the new binary distro
to avoid confusion (as most
But since there is no signal, I think it is not a good thing.
Let's wait for a while, but other projects in incubator have a better
growing community.
Just my $0.02
-Matthias
On 6/8/06, Yoav Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hola,
I am curious of how Apache Incubator works and whether
On 6/7/06, Jochen Wiedmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
this is possibly OT, so I apologize in advance. A while ago there has
been a discussion around a separate project for specifications on this
list, which grew into nothing. Currently I am on the way to publish a
clean room implementation of
On 6/8/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
in [the JSF API] there are lots of classes with lots of code and logic.
Not uncommon, which is why I generally consider an API project to be a bit
of a waste.
depends on what you mean by project :)
if a top level project is meant, i now
+1
On 5 Jun 06, at 10:46 AM 5 Jun 06, James Strachan wrote:
We ended up recutting the binary of the 4.0 release of ActiveMQ to
address a few issues brought up in the Incubator PMC vote; I'd just
like to call another vote to explicitly approve the new binary distro
to avoid confusion (as most
