Re: UPDATE - Re: [VOTE] Graduate Harmony to TLP status (pending board approval)

Congratulations on the board vote. +1 for graduation, and good luck. Craig On Oct 25, 2006, at 1:13 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: As noted in the vote email : Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Under the Incubator process, Harmony must have a destination prior to exiting incubation, which means the

[STATUS] (incubator) Wed Oct 25 23:59:24 2006

APACHE INCUBATOR PROJECT STATUS: -*-indented-text-*- Last modified at [$Date: 2006-02-05 04:40:19 -0500 (Sun, 05 Feb 2006) $] Web site: http://Incubator.Apache.Org/ Wiki page: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ [note: the Web site is the 'official' documentation; the wiki

Re: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members

Thanks Martijn. Regards, Antoine Martijn Dashorst wrote: > PPMC = Podling project management committee > IPMC = Incubator project management committee > > if I'm not mistaken. > > Martijn > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PR

RE: Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > What problem are you trying to solve? Garrett's view is that you basically > > "discarded" the Initial Committer list, treated it as advisory, and dealt > > with Committers after the fact. So a minimal Initial Committer list would > > be nul

RE: Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > Anyway, I do realize that the discussion was two weeks ago. I just > missed it. Apologies. Ignore me :) No way! Yes, discussion started weeks ago, stopped, and so I called a vote. But I would never want to arbitrarily cut off discussion. --- Noel -

Re: Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

Anyway, I do realize that the discussion was two weeks ago. I just missed it. Apologies. Ignore me :) geir Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Should this really be "Shall"? We've been successful

RE: UPDATE - Re: [VOTE] Graduate Harmony to TLP status (pending board approval)

> the board considered and accepted the TLP proposal for Harmony > at today's board meeting Congratulations. :-) --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

Noel J. Bergman wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Should this really be "Shall"? We've been successful in Harmony with a slightly different model, where we didn't just sweep committers in except for the mentors and champion, because we didnt'

RE: JiniProposal -> BraintreeProposal

Greg Stein wrote: > It doesn't matter whatsoever as long as you are VERY consistently > calling it "Apache Braintree" as you should be doing _anyways_ Would that apply equally to the two names that were more highly rated by the JINI community than the one selected? What is the criteria? This to

Re: JiniProposal -> BraintreeProposal

It doesn't matter whatsoever as long as you are VERY consistently calling it "Apache Braintree" as you should be doing _anyways_ On 10/25/06, Jim Hurley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thanks, Noel. I'm not sure if the potential trademark conflicts are problems in this case -- it's always a matter o

RE: Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: >> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >>> Should this really be "Shall"? We've been successful in Harmony with a >>> slightly different model, where we didn't just sweep committers in >>> except for the mentors and champion, because we didnt' start with an

RE: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members

> What does PPMC mean ? Is it the sub PMC of a particular incubator project ? See: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMA

RE: How to submit policy changes?

Noel J. Bergman wrote: > robert burrell donkin wrote: > > therefore to avoid a second vote to record a policy already approved, > > all policy changes should be proposed in the form of patches to the > > policy document. > I see your point, but it seems a tad excessive. And it may not make the >

Re: Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

Noel J. Bergman wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Should this really be "Shall"? We've been successful in Harmony with a slightly different model, where we didn't just sweep committers in except for the mentors and champion, because we didnt' start with any code. Yes, it should be a Shall,

Re: Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

On 10/25/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > Should this really be "Shall"? We've been successful in Harmony with a > slightly different model, where we didn't just sweep committers in > except for the mentors and champion, because we didnt' start with any

How to submit policy changes?

robert burrell donkin wrote: > i've come to the strong opinion that all policy needs to be recorded > and document on the incubator site. Agreed. > all changes to the policy document require a formal vote. Which is what is being called here, after discussion since ApacheCon. > therefore to avo

RE: Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > Should this really be "Shall"? We've been successful in Harmony with a > slightly different model, where we didn't just sweep committers in > except for the mentors and champion, because we didnt' start with any code. Yes, it should be a Shall, since it has been made

Re: JiniProposal -> BraintreeProposal

Thanks, Noel. I'm not sure if the potential trademark conflicts are problems in this case -- it's always a matter of gauging risk, and it's not clear if they'd be a problem or not. I agree that we'd like to get going, and we can address the name issue again during incubation. thanks -Jim On Oc

Comment - (Was [Fwd: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members])

I didn't want to mess up the vote thread... Should this really be "Shall"? We've been successful in Harmony with a slightly different model, where we didn't just sweep committers in except for the mentors and champion, because we didnt' start with any code. We treated the Initial Committer l

Re: Re: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members

PPMC = Podling project management committee IPMC = Incubator project management committee if I'm not mistaken. Martijn On 10/25/06, Antoine Levy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Noel, sorry to ask a basic question. What does PPMC mean ? Is it the sub PMC of a particular incubator p

Re: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members

Hello Noel, sorry to ask a basic question. What does PPMC mean ? Is it the sub PMC of a particular incubator project ? Regards, Antoine Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 16:12:19 -0400 Von: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An: general@incubator.apache.org Betreff

Re: [doc] final call for review on http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html

On 10/23/06, Rahul Akolkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Would you like a patch for any of this? usually easier to patch than explain ;-) i've committed a fix for c) and amended the phrasing highlighted in d) can't update the site ATM so these changes won't be reflected there yet the code se

Re: UPDATE - Re: [VOTE] Graduate Harmony to TLP status (pending board approval)

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > I'm happy to report that much to my surprise and delight, the board > considered and accepted the TLP proposal for Harmony at today's board > meeting, so the above condition is satisfied. Hurray! Good work all round. > I look forward to completing this vote. (Some time

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Harmony to TLP status (pending board approval)

+1 On Oct 24, 2006, at 4:02 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: The Apache Harmony community has voted to request graduation from the Incubator as a TLP. The following votes have been reco

Re: [VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members

On 10/25/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Based upon all of the discussion -- and positive feedback from Dims, Eric Newcomer, Craig Russell, Jason van Zyl, Martijn Dashorst, David Recordon and Nail Pemberton; slight negative feedback from Leo Simons; and no strongly negative feedba

UPDATE - Re: [VOTE] Graduate Harmony to TLP status (pending board approval)

As noted in the vote email : Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Under the Incubator process, Harmony must have a destination prior to exiting incubation, which means the ASF Board must decide whether or not create a TLP for Apache Harmony prior to the Incubator vote being official. However, I suspect t

[VOTE] REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members

Based upon all of the discussion -- and positive feedback from Dims, Eric Newcomer, Craig Russell, Jason van Zyl, Martijn Dashorst, David Recordon and Nail Pemberton; slight negative feedback from Leo Simons; and no strongly negative feedback that I notice -- this is now put forth for a formal vot

RE: REVISED Policy on Initial Committer and PPMC members

Leo Simons wrote: > I have never liked this explicit "champion" role, and I don't like > adding responsibilities to it, making things even more explicitly > dependent on the champion. Keep in mind that the Champion role would still end with the begining of Incubation. So the Champion's role is h

RE: JiniProposal -> BraintreeProposal

In any event, let's get this thing going. *IF* the name has to change again, it can change again. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: RE: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

On 10/25/06, Antoine Levy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Garrett, I am not an Ivy contributor, but an ASF member and an ANT PMC member who has volunteered as champion and mentor for Ivy. I do not want to start checking in code, I just would like the possibility to start creating an ivy

Re: RE: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

Hello Garrett, I am not an Ivy contributor, but an ASF member and an ANT PMC member who has volunteered as champion and mentor for Ivy. I do not want to start checking in code, I just would like the possibility to start creating an ivy folder on the incubator web site. Leo wrote that the fact

Re: RE: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

On 10/25/06, Antoine Levy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Understood. Actually, I do not need to become a member of the incubator PMC either, but I would very much like to have the svn and UNIX karma to edit and publish elements of the web site of ivy. Ok, slow down a bit. I'm all for enth

Re: RE: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

Hello, Thanks very much Noel for moderating me in. Regards, Antoine Original-Nachricht Datum: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 11:29:44 -0400 Von: "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> An: general@incubator.apache.org Betreff: RE: [PROPOSAL] Ivy > Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: > > > I have s

[VOTE] - Ratify Tuscany PPMC vote to release SDO for Java M2 artifacts

The Tuscany PPMC has voted to release the SDO for Java API implementation as part of the M2 release. In accordance with Incubator release procedures we are asking the Incubator PMC to approve this release. Vote thread:* *http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg09797.html Result t

RE: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: > I have sent an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] but no > one has moderated me in yet. Instant Gratification much? No one else had gotten to it, but it got done by me this AM. Please note, that is NOT the same thing as requesting to join the Incubator PMC. --- N

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ivy

Xavier Hanin wrote: > On 10/25/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There is a DIFFERENT form, a Software Grant, which would be needed for a >> wholesale import of a code base owned by another party. See >> >> http://www.apache.org/licenses/#grants (very bottom paragraph.) > >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ivy

Leo Simons wrote: > Bill, dude, > > Like I wrote already, incubator policy is that we do not vote on > accepting entry for subprojects to existing TLPs that such TLP has > already voted on and is sponsoring. Ok, I missed that ... see the suggested thread name above :-P You don't call something a

Re: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

Bill, dude, On Oct 25, 2006, at 3:14 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Would everyone agree with Leo that it is OK to start asking for infrastructural resources ? Nope, first off with the server disruption, there's really been only a day since the proposal was flo

Re: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

On 10/25/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Xavier Hanin wrote: > > I've just sent both an individual and a corporate CLA by fax. I was not > sure the corporate CLA was necessary, but since Jayasoft is the current > copyright holder of Ivy, I thought it might be required. Proba

Re: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

Xavier Hanin wrote: > > I've just sent both an individual and a corporate CLA by fax. I was not > sure the corporate CLA was necessary, but since Jayasoft is the current > copyright holder of Ivy, I thought it might be required. Probably a good idea; the point to a Corporate CLA is actually an agr

Re: [PROPOSAL] Ivy

On 10/25/06, Antoine Levy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I suppose the Ivy committers need to send a CLA in any case ? Xavier, Maarten, maybe you should read this http://www.apache.org/dev/ and particularly this http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html. I've just sent both an i