+1 (non binding)
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Francis De Brabandere
franci...@gmail.comwrote:
+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org
wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The
group of developers behind
+1 (non-binding)
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group of
developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address all potential
obstacles to the Incubator acceptance and to
[ x ] +1 Accept Openmeetings for incubation
[ ] +0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Reject for the following reason:
Cheers
Daniel
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group of
developers behind it
The voting period has now closed. There were no additional votes on this list;
thus, the vote is successful.
The following are the IPMC members who voted +1 on the DEV list:
Ate Douma: +1
Ross Gardler: +1
Hadrian Zbarcea: +1
-Original Message-
From: Franklin, Matthew B.
+1
Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group
of developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address all
potential obstacles to the Incubator acceptance and to the following
incubation. They even went an extra mile and
This is a great and unique project. Glad to see it here.
+1.
Bruno.
On 08/11/2011, at 04:53, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group of
developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address all potential
obstacles to the
+1
On 7 November 2011 22:53, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group of
developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address all potential
obstacles to the Incubator acceptance and to the following
+1
-- dims
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
+1
On 7 November 2011 22:53, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group
of developers behind it worked hard (and
+1
Ate
On 11/07/2011 10:53 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group of
developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address all potential
obstacles to the Incubator acceptance and to the following incubation. They
even went
+1
Regards
JB
On 11/08/2011 10:41 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
+1
Ate
On 11/07/2011 10:53 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The
group of developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address
all potential obstacles to the Incubator
+1, definitely.
Deepal
+1
On 7 November 2011 22:53, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group
of developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address all potential
obstacles to the Incubator acceptance
Hi,
the Apache Lucene project has received a contribution of a Japanese
morphological analyzer (Kuromoji)
* The code is attached to the LUCENE-3305 JIRA issue [1]
* The IP Clearance form has been committed to the Incubator website. [2]
* A vote has passed on the dev@l.a.o mailing list [3]
The
On Nov 8, 2011, at 9:53 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
[X] +1 Accept Openmeetings for incubation
[ ] +0 Don't care
[ ] -1 Reject for the following reason:
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For
+1
Yegor
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Andrus Adamchik and...@objectstyle.org wrote:
Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group of
developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address all potential
obstacles to the Incubator acceptance and to the
14 matches
Mail list logo
