Hi,
On 8/15/06, Geir Magnusson Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that we should consider the Jini standard separately - we have a
community and a codebase, and should proceed with that now. Because it
still is a standard we can work on that in parallel if all parties are
willing.
+1
I
I think we've had good discussion and have furthered the thinking
in some areas that were contentious in the Proposal. We're probably
aligned in some places and still have differences of opinion in others.
I'll try and summarize in an email over the weekend to help (at least
me!) sync where we
Yeah, I find this a bit confusing too. The ibiblio repository
distribution policy is unrelated to Apache's. No one is making any
claims on ibiblio about the licensing (other than its freely
distributable)/community/etc - I mean, come on, there are sourceforge
binaries on there! :-)
Also,
On 18 Aug 06, at 11:30 AM 18 Aug 06, Dan Diephouse wrote:
Yeah, I find this a bit confusing too. The ibiblio repository
distribution policy is unrelated to Apache's. No one is making any
claims on ibiblio about the licensing (other than its freely
distributable)/community/etc - I mean,
On Aug 18, 2006, at 8:49 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 18 Aug 06, at 11:30 AM 18 Aug 06, Dan Diephouse wrote:
Yeah, I find this a bit confusing too. The ibiblio repository
distribution policy is unrelated to Apache's. No one is making any
claims on ibiblio about the licensing (other than
Jason,
why don't you start a vote with a detailed note? Let's make a policy decision :)
thanks,
dims
On 8/18/06, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 18 Aug 06, at 11:30 AM 18 Aug 06, Dan Diephouse wrote:
Yeah, I find this a bit confusing too. The ibiblio repository
distribution
On 18 Aug 06, at 5:02 PM 18 Aug 06, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Jason,
why don't you start a vote with a detailed note? Let's make a
policy decision :)
Will do, but shall we do this on a separate list as people indicated
they would like to do? To keep the policy making/deciding off this
On 8/17/06, Hiram Chirino [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0.2 release
binary.
We would now like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC to
perform the release.
(i've
On 18 Aug 06, at 6:17 PM 18 Aug 06, robert burrell donkin wrote:
(we need a script or something to check for license headers)
Checkstyle works well at doing this for the java sources, at least.
- robert
-
To unsubscribe,
