On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 08:56 -0700, Charles Mark wrote:
> It looks like that the companies that initiatied Kabuki have no real
> interest in getting the project going on at Apache. There is going to
> be a session at Apache EU on Kabuki by Scott Dietzen - can somebody
> ask him?
>From what I un
robert burrell donkin wrote:
>> > 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.
>
> both would be best
>
> a lot of projects are still maven 1. what
On 6/9/06, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 09:15:25AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> 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 Mave
On 6/12/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Passed with +1s from jstrachan, jim, jvanzyl, brianm and no -1s.
i'm still a bit concerned about potential legal issues if the uber is
distributed through the maven repository but it's this release has been
held up far too long already...
+1 from me as well. Sorry.
geir
James Strachan wrote:
> Passed with +1s from jstrachan, jim, jvanzyl, brianm and no -1s.
>
> Many thanks to all those who responded to the plethora of emails to
> get the release distro into good shape :)
>
> On 6/5/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Passed with +1s from jstrachan, jim, jvanzyl, brianm and no -1s.
Many thanks to all those who responded to the plethora of emails to
get the release distro into good shape :)
On 6/5/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We ended up recutting the binary of the 4.0 release of ActiveMQ to
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 6/11/06, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Their "real" legal name is only used in cases where it is actually
>> legally required. In all other cases, we use their private
>> name. This is even the case for things like the member
>> attendance records of t
On 6/11/06, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Their "real" legal name is only used in cases where it is actually
legally required. In all other cases, we use their private
name. This is even the case for things like the member
attendance records of the foundation, etc...
In short, I th
