On Tuesday 12 February 2008 02:35, Craig L Russell wrote:
The difference is that committers in a TLP have been granted this
privilege based on their merit, not just by updating a wiki page
saying that they're interested.
Actually, if/where this is the case, it is not proper. I want to only
On Feb 10, 2008 10:54 PM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 8, 2008, at 1:27 AM, Ted Husted wrote:
Here's my binding +1 on the Thrift proposal.
+1!
+1
On Jan 23, 2008 9:07 PM, Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
We've just posted the Apache Incubator proposal for
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Tuesday 12 February 2008 02:35, Craig L Russell wrote:
The difference is that committers in a TLP have been granted this
privilege based on their merit, not just by updating a wiki page
saying that they're interested.
Actually, if/where this is the case, it is not
Hi Bill,
On Feb 13, 2008, at 4:09 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
In projects where commit is handed out with ease, and that commit is
never used, at some point it should be reviewed (and this should
happen
BEFORE graduation, as a precondition of graduation, not as a trigger
upon
I'd like to add a few words hopefully to clarify a few things:
The base code BEA is donating to this project is an implementation started from
scratch by me, Radu and Wing Yew as the only contributors, it has nothing to do
with Tuscany, so there is no way this code can be interpreted as a fork
On Feb 13, 2008 1:09 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... In projects where commit is handed out with ease, and that commit is
never used, at some point it should be reviewed (and this should happen
BEFORE graduation, as a precondition of graduation, not as a trigger
upon
On Feb 13, 2008, at 1:38 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Feb 13, 2008 1:09 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
... In projects where commit is handed out with ease, and that
commit is
never used, at some point it should be reviewed (and this should
happen
BEFORE
J Aaron Farr wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
Leo already gave a decent explanation.
Basically, it comes down to two aspects:
1) infrastructure support
2) cultural bias
Only the first one is marginally correct, IMO.
+1
On Feb 7, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Ted Husted wrote:
Here's my binding +1 on the Thrift proposal.
On Jan 23, 2008 9:07 PM, Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
We've just posted the Apache Incubator proposal for Thrift onto the
Wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ThriftProposal
+1
On Feb 9, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
We've had an initial discussion, which attracted a number of messages
of encouragement, and identified no issues or concerns. Then we
proceeded onto a proposal, which attracted three excellent mentors.
Now it is time to vote on the proposal
No, there was no vote and is not vote, nor is there any choice.
Subversion is one of the few things that the Board has mandated,
imposed on all projects. Period. Pretty much end of discussion.
I would assume though that if there is enough interest among the
community, the subject of
11 matches
Mail list logo
