On 6/28/11 7:49 AM, berndf wrote:
Hi everyone,
this is a vote to retire the Bluesky podling.
+1
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
F
+1
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 3:37 AM, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose Deft to be an Apache Incubator project. Deft
> is a non-blocking, asynchronous, event driven high performance web
> framework running on the JVM.
>
> Here's a link to the proposal in the Incubator wiki:
+1
Martijn
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 7:49 AM, berndf wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> this is a vote to retire the Bluesky podling.
>
> 3.5 years into incubation, the podling has not made progress in terms of
> becoming an Apache project. Dev is still done behind closed doors, and
> developers are changi
I'm top posting because you've answered most of the immediate issues I
had. I apologise for not having looked deeper and found the activity
you are referring to. I was clearly only looking at top level mailing
lists. Thanks for taking the time to point me in the right direction,
that kenai site is
Hi everyone,
this is a vote to retire the Bluesky podling.
3.5 years into incubation, the podling has not made progress in terms of
becoming an Apache project. Dev is still done behind closed doors, and
developers are changing frequently without notifications on the public
lists. Mentors are M.I.
Hey Hyrum,
Thanks!
Cheers,
Chris
On Jun 27, 2011, at 7:24 PM, Hyrum K Wright wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>> Yep, makes sense. Like I told Benson, I wasn't exactly sure if the mirroring
>> system were read only downstream of the Apache root so
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Yep, makes sense. Like I told Benson, I wasn't exactly sure if the mirroring
> system were read only downstream of the Apache root sources (IOW, I thought
> we had more control then in reality we did).
>
> BTW, if someone could p
On Jun 27, 2011, at 5:51 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:45 PM, Daniel Shahaf
wrote:
Rob Weir wrote on Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 19:00:50 -0400:
Hi Dennis,
If I understand correctly, the practice at Apache would be to remove
these legacy copyright statements and aggregate them int
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 8:45 PM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote on Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 19:00:50 -0400:
>> Hi Dennis,
>>
>> If I understand correctly, the practice at Apache would be to remove
>> these legacy copyright statements and aggregate them into a single
>> NOTICE document. This wo
Rob Weir wrote on Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 19:00:50 -0400:
> Hi Dennis,
>
> If I understand correctly, the practice at Apache would be to remove
> these legacy copyright statements and aggregate them into a single
> NOTICE document. This would be true, even if it says "DO NOT ALTER OR
> REMOVE". I i
Keep in mind this thread is in three places or two places or one place all
depending on how people have replied. It will be confusing. Please include
POI-DEV so we can discuss it here without going everywhere else as well.
On Jun 27, 2011, at 3:44 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> FYI Apache OpenOffic
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
> Hi Dennis,
>
> If I understand correctly, the practice at Apache would be to remove
> these legacy copyright statements and aggregate them into a single
> NOTICE document. This would be true, even if it says "DO NOT ALTER OR
> REMOVE". I imagine
Hi Rob and all,
Please help a non-English speaker, it's me :) , in the midst of
jargon; ODF, Apache, OASIS, ISO/IEC JTC1, OpenOffice, LibreOffice,
Symphony, KOffice/Calligra, Microsoft Office, Corel Wordperfect,
Google Docs, ODFDOM, DOM API, Conformance Tools, XSLTRunner, AODL,
C#/.NET, Java, PDFB
Hi Dennis,
If I understand correctly, the practice at Apache would be to remove
these legacy copyright statements and aggregate them into a single
NOTICE document. This would be true, even if it says "DO NOT ALTER OR
REMOVE". I imagine they would even tear off those tags on mattresses.
-Rob
On
FYI Apache OpenOffice.org podling has been active for two weeks. Information
is here.
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/
What do the people here on the POI project think of gettin
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Lee Fisher wrote:
>> There is activity. It just is not evenly distributed.
> [...]
>
> I presume the activity is more in the Java libraries. :-)
>
I not asking you to presume anything. I'm just following up on
interest expressed on this list a few weeks ago. I
> There is activity. It just is not evenly distributed.
[...]
I presume the activity is more in the Java libraries. :-)
As for activity in the AODL, the .NET library:
The home page's link to source is broken.
http://odftoolkit.org/projects/aodl/pages/Home
points to:
http://odftoolkit.org/sourc
Yep, makes sense. Like I told Benson, I wasn't exactly sure if the mirroring
system were read only downstream of the Apache root sources (IOW, I thought we
had more control then in reality we did).
BTW, if someone could point me to a document where this is described, that
would certainly help m
Chris,
This is related to why it also matters how you get and verify your browser.
If someone were to successfully distribute a build of Firefox or Chrome with
bogus root certs, they could potentially do a lot of damage.
--- Noel
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> Thanks Rob,
>
> Looking I've the Kenai site I notice that there is as good as no visible
> activity within the project. You mention that the "ODF Toolkit Union Steering
> Committee" met and approved the idea of this proposal, but this is not
Gotcha!
OK makes sense. I wasn't sure how the mirroring system worked, and whether or
not the mirrors were read-only downstream of the Apache source (I guess we
can't ensure that, right?)
If that's the case, then I'm +1 for what you're saying.
Cheers,
Chris
On Jun 27, 2011, at 1:48 PM, Benson
Mirrors.
Lots of non-apache people work for all those many companies that
operate all those many, many, mirrors.
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Benson,
>
> On Jun 27, 2011, at 1:37 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> Chris,
>>
>> If my goal was to hoodwink y
Hi Benson,
On Jun 27, 2011, at 1:37 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Chris,
>
> If my goal was to hoodwink you, I'd create a bogus key that claimed to
> be owned by an Apache person, put it in a KEYS file, and include in
> the release, and sign the release with it. If I was lucky, you'd just
> veri
Chris,
If my goal was to hoodwink you, I'd create a bogus key that claimed to
be owned by an Apache person, put it in a KEYS file, and include in
the release, and sign the release with it. If I was lucky, you'd just
verify the release with the embedded key, and I'd have succeeded. We
want people t
I support this idea.
I think with regard to need for an SGA or not, there is the matter of the
current headings at the tops of source files. (I have no idea what is
required, I'm simply
observing what is there.)
- Dennis
"/***
Thanks Rob,
Looking I've the Kenai site I notice that there is as good as no visible
activity within the project. You mention that the "ODF Toolkit Union Steering
Committee" met and approved the idea of this proposal, but this is not visible
so we don't know what this means.
What interest is
On Jun 27, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> we copy a KEYS file into that directory upon succesful VOTE of the release
>> artifacts (which also include the KEYS file).
>
> Perhaps, but the point we're getting at was explicitly stated by Benson,
> "The goal here is to allow and encoura
> we copy a KEYS file into that directory upon succesful VOTE of the release
> artifacts (which also include the KEYS file).
Perhaps, but the point we're getting at was explicitly stated by Benson,
"The goal here is to allow and encourage consumers to independently verify
signatures. That calls f
I'm cc'ing the POI and OpenOffice projects, inviting them to join this
discussion on the Incubator general list: general@incubator.apache.org
When we were discussing the OpenOffice proposal a few weeks ago I
mentioned that there was another set of technology called the ODF
Toolkit, that we might w
Hi All,
Just for clarification here (since Gora was specifically called out), we also
maintain KEYS files in
the podling dist directory as well. However, we copy a KEYS file into that
directory upon succesful
VOTE of the release artifacts (which also include the KEYS file). So it's not
either
It seems to me that KEYS in the release is somewhat counterproductive.
The goal here is to allow and encourage consumers to independently
verify signatures. That calls for KEYS somewhere else than inside the
package.
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:10 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> Jukka Zitting wrote on M
On 6/27/11 1:20 PM, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
Interesting. May be it can revive the AsyncWeb project.
There is an obvious connection, so some collaboration would be of interest.
Yes, as it's mentioned in the wiki. This is why I'm inter
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
> Interesting. May be it can revive the AsyncWeb project.
There is an obvious connection, so some collaboration would be of interest.
> If this project needs a mentor, I can be one of them.
You would be very welcome. Feel free to sign up
PMCs -
we are currently voting on the next log4php release (see below).
Please take yourself a few minutes and participate in the vote.
I am - unfortunately - the only PMC involved in log4php, so we need your voices
Cheers
Christian
-- Forwarded message --
From: Ivan Habunek
D
On 6/27/11 12:37 PM, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
Hi,
I would like to propose Deft to be an Apache Incubator project. Deft
is a non-blocking, asynchronous, event driven high performance web
framework running on the JVM.
Here's a link to the proposal in the Incubator wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/inc
Jukka Zitting wrote on Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 11:07:11 +0200:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > It seems to me to be a bad idea to distribute keys with releases. And don't
> > we already have some ASF-wide policy for managing keys?
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev
Very interesting stuff.
Good luck with the proposal!
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose Deft to be an Apache Incubator project. Deft
> is a non-blocking, asynchronous, event driven high performance web
> framework running on the JVM.
>
> He
Hi,
I would like to propose Deft to be an Apache Incubator project. Deft
is a non-blocking, asynchronous, event driven high performance web
framework running on the JVM.
Here's a link to the proposal in the Incubator wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/DeftProposal
As you will note, the list
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> It seems to me to be a bad idea to distribute keys with releases. And don't
> we already have some ASF-wide policy for managing keys?
http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#keys-policy
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/relea
+1
KEYS should not be distributed with a release, even if the central key
infrastructure is not used, at least release manager should point
people checking the release to where they can find the KEYS so they
can check release signatures, which is normally the way used with most
of the projects I
40 matches
Mail list logo
