On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/28/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I understand the current rules of the incubator forbid the use of the
> > apache mirrors for incubating projects.
>
> The maven re
On 7/28/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I understand the current rules of the incubator forbid the use of the
> apache mirrors for incubating projects.
The maven repositories are no longer mirrored, so that rule is no
longer ap
On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I understand the current rules of the incubator forbid the use of the
apache mirrors for incubating projects.
The maven repositories are no longer mirrored, so that rule is no
longer applicable for releasing jars into the maven repository.
On Friday 28 July 2006 11:48, Martin Cooper wrote:
> That _is_ the first thing I think of in relation to Glasgow
Me too...
Does that mean we have been around too long and should plan retirement ;o)
Cheers
Niclas
-
To unsubscr
On 7/27/06, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Martin,
For just a moment, I thought you were serious.
I was. That _is_ the first thing I think of in relation to Glasgow and
software. Just because it's not the latest technology doesn't make me forget
the association. ;-)
It does s
Hi Martin,
For just a moment, I thought you were serious.
JavaBeans Activation Framework, 1999.
JavaBeans Drag and Drop, 1998.
If Glasgow were really a software name to be worried about, I think
we might have heard more of it in the last 6 years...
Craig
On Jul 27, 2006, at 6:48 PM, Martin
I think of no associations with software projects when hearing Glasgow.
Craig
On Jul 27, 2006, at 6:48 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
On 7/27/06, Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/27/06, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Garrett
>
> Some of us spoke about this at lunch. As
On 7/27/06, Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/27/06, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Garrett
>
> Some of us spoke about this at lunch. As Glasgow is part of the
> university name, "Glasgow Haskell"
> it should not present a conflict. In addition, our legal department ha
On 7/27/06, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Garrett
Some of us spoke about this at lunch. As Glasgow is part of the
university name, "Glasgow Haskell"
it should not present a conflict. In addition, our legal department has
conducted a trademark search of
the word "Glasgow" and come up
Garrett
Some of us spoke about this at lunch. As Glasgow is part of the
university name, "Glasgow Haskell"
it should not present a conflict. In addition, our legal department has
conducted a trademark search of
the word "Glasgow" and come up with no software-related registrations.
Regards
Ca
On 7/27/06, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
After debate, and many trademark searches we have selected new name
that is free of any trademarks in the software space. ( not that easy)
The new name for Blaze is Glasgow.
I will update the wiki.
How about the Glasgow Haskell Compiler?
Hi Martijn,
My email is spotty for some reason; I haven't seen much feedback for
you on the alias. Here's my take:
On Jul 27, 2006, at 7:04 AM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
Can we take the code in the Apache incubator svn, build a release, and
release it on sf.net (our previous host) without bra
On Friday 28 July 2006 00:17, Leo Simons wrote:
> * release elsewhere, making sure to give things an appropriately different
> name and making sure both users and the incubator PMC understand what it
> all means and what is going on
Oscar 1.0 became Apache Felix (incubating), and Richard Ha
+0 (I'd love to see it happen, but don't expect to be able to
contribute).
Nice folks, and anything with Upayavira, Sylvain, and Alex involved
is destined to conquer the world anyway :-)
-Brian
On Jul 26, 2006, at 8:54 AM, Upayavira wrote:
The Wicket developers (http://wicket.sourceforge
On Wednesday 26 July 2006 23:54, Upayavira wrote:
> The Wicket developers (http://wicket.sourceforge.net) have expressed a
> desire to incubate their project within the ASF.
+1, non-binding.
The Wicket community is vibrant, diverse and already operating closely to
the "Apache Way", and (if I may
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 09:37:04AM -0700, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> >* release elsewhere, making sure to give things an appropriately different
> > name and making sure both users and the incubator PMC understand what
> > it all means and what is going on
>
> imho, i would much rather see wicket-
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 10:02:07AM -0700, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> What I more like that a seperate maven1/2 repo is maybe a incubator
> continuum server.
> Currently Trinidad uses that MyFaces continuum server.
>
> What do you think?
Doesn't make sense to me. Where possible incubator shouldn
On 7/27/06, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
After debate, and many trademark searches we have selected new name
that is free of any trademarks in the software space.
great
( not that easy)
not easy at all :-)
thanks
- robert
-
After debate, and many trademark searches we have selected new name
that is free of any trademarks in the software space. ( not that easy)
The new name for Blaze is Glasgow.
I will update the wiki.
Regards
Carl.
Carl Trieloff wrote:
Naming of Blaze,
Based on all the feedback provided, and
On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/27/06, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I understand the current rules of the incubator forbid the use of the
> > apache mirrors for incubating projects.
>
> Why do y
imho, i would much rather see wicket-1.2.2 rather then
wicket-incubating-1.2.2 as a release. to me incubating says "not ready for
production use". it might mean something different in the apache context
but
we cant expect all our existing users or those who stumble upon wicket for
the first time t
> So we put this to the guideline?
> incubator + mX (+ SNAPSHOT)
I'd like to get another Maven "expert" in here on this, but I know I've
seen "issues" with having a version that doesn't start with a number. Thus,
something like:
0.1-incubator-m1-SNAPSHOT
or
1.0-incubator-m1-SNAPSHOT
or similar
On Thursday July 27 2006 1:13 pm, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > > incubator-m1-SNAPSHOT
> > >
> > > incubator +
> > > m1 = milestone1
> > > + SNAPSHOT (since no m1 release yet)
> >
> > Sounds good to me.
>
> So we put this to the guideline?
> incubator + mX (+ SNAPSHOT)
I'd like to get another
We could do - though given the choice I'd rather keep the m2 snapshot
repo for just snapshots (of both incubating and non-incubating
projects) and use the existing m2 repo for just actual releases of
projects (both incubating and non-incubating).
+1
we already do
http://people.apache.org/repo/m
On 7/27/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > incubator-m1-SNAPSHOT
> >
> > incubator +
> > m1 = milestone1
> > + SNAPSHOT (since no m1 release yet)
>
> Sounds good to me.
So we put this to the guideline?
incubator + mX (+ SNAPSHOT)
> > What I more like that a seperate maven
> incubator-m1-SNAPSHOT
>
> incubator +
> m1 = milestone1
> + SNAPSHOT (since no m1 release yet)
Sounds good to me.
So we put this to the guideline?
incubator + mX (+ SNAPSHOT)
> What I more like that a seperate maven1/2 repo is maybe a incubator
> continuum server.
> Currently Trinidad us
On 7/27/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Actually thats a good argument for using a single maven 2 repository
> for incubating and non-incubating releases and forcing the use of the
> 'incubator/incubating' text in the version of incubating projects
> releases. As it means if
Actually thats a good argument for using a single maven 2 repository
for incubating and non-incubating releases and forcing the use of the
'incubator/incubating' text in the version of incubating projects
releases. As it means if you are looking at the POM its immediately
obvious what the incubati
* release elsewhere, making sure to give things an appropriately different
name and making sure both users and the incubator PMC understand what
it
all means and what is going on
imho, i would much rather see wicket-1.2.2 rather then
wicket-incubating-1.2.2 as a release. to me incubating
Hey Martijn, guys,
I'd really like to encourage you to take a look at how different
established projects that joined apache through the incubator have
handled this (spamassassin, stdcxx. roller, ofbiz, ...), as well as
some of the discussion about this "releases from incubating projects"
policy an
BTW Thanks everyone for the support!
On the release note:
We are very committed to support our community even when we're
undergoing incubation. This would typically mean that we might need to
release Wicket versions. As releases marked as incubated will probably
raise an eyebrow or two, what are
Leo Simons wrote:
> Nice proposal. Seems like a no-brainer. More Dutchies at apache is
> always a good thing ;)
>
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 04:54:15PM +0100, Upayavira wrote:
>> === Versions ===
>>
>> Wicket currently has three versions of their code base, 1.2 (the current
>> release), 1.3 (planne
On 7/27/06, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 09:14:11AM +0100, James Strachan wrote:
> I understand the current rules of the incubator forbid the use of the
> apache mirrors for incubating projects.
I didn't know of that rule. Can't find it on the web anywhere, at le
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 09:14:11AM +0100, James Strachan wrote:
> I understand the current rules of the incubator forbid the use of the
> apache mirrors for incubating projects.
I didn't know of that rule. Can't find it on the web anywhere, at least.
If it is a rule, then there's some violations.
On 7/27/06, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nice proposal. Seems like a no-brainer. More Dutchies at apache is
always a good thing ;)
These Dutchies should get a life ;)
> * Chris Turner is from the UK and works as an independent consultant.
> He does not intend to move with us to Apac
> * Chris Turner is from the UK and works as an independent consultant.
> He does not intend to move with us to Apache.
What does that mean? Does he not think wicket should move to apache? Does
he not want to sign a CLA? Is there consensus within wicket on this move
or isn't there?
Chris is
Nice proposal. Seems like a no-brainer. More Dutchies at apache is
always a good thing ;)
On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 04:54:15PM +0100, Upayavira wrote:
> === Versions ===
>
> Wicket currently has three versions of their code base, 1.2 (the current
> release), 1.3 (planned) and 2.0 (unreleased).
>
>
On 7/27/06, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I understand the current rules of the incubator forbid the use of the
> apache mirrors for incubating projects.
Why do you think so? If, as you say, the artifact Id explicitly
contains
We currently have a maven 2 repository for maven 2 snapshot releases
of incubating projects...
http://people.apache.org/maven-snapshot-repository/
we also have a maven 1 repository for both incubating and
non-incubating projects
http://people.apache.org/repository/
and we have a maven2 repositor
On 7/27/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I understand the current rules of the incubator forbid the use of the
apache mirrors for incubating projects.
Why do you think so? If, as you say, the artifact Id explicitly
contains the term "incubator", then I would think that that is
abs
40 matches
Mail list logo
