+1
However, somehow my mail is wrong, should be pa...@apache.org and
_not_ kpa...@apache.org
regards,
Karl
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Marcel Offermans
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> As the discussion about the resolution [1] offered no further feedback, it is
> time for the Apache ACE commu
Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote on Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 11:15:28 -0800:
> On Dec 18, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Marcel Offermans wrote:
> > and, IF it somehow requires Hadoop (see question above) that
> > definition should probably be extended with something like "for
> > Hadoop".
>
> It doesn't require it
Sorry, please ignore this one, I clicked send by mistake :(. Will send the
complete one later.
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 9:17 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
> Hi...
>
>It has been discussed, since a while, about the graduation of Apache
> Bean Validation, whether to graduate to a TLP or Subpro
Hi...
It has been discussed, since a while, about the graduation of Apache
Bean Validation, whether to graduate to a TLP or Subproject and whether it
is time or not, [1], [2] and [3].
In the past few weeks there has been a [VOTE], [4], which formally
discussed the graduation to a TLP project. R
Hey Marcel,
On Dec 18, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>
> In my view, ORM is middeware, but not all middleware is ORM. That's why I see
> it as an extension. More precise, you do state it's not just middleware, but
> "persistence, storage and retrieval middleware", but even that in
On Dec 18, 2011, at 18:15 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2011, at 3:28 AM, Marcel Offermans wrote:
>> On Dec 18, 2011, at 6:54 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>> On Dec 17, 2011, at 6:16 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
I think the Board might have an issue with the 'purpose' o
Hey Marcel,
Thanks for your feedback. Comments below:
On Dec 18, 2011, at 3:28 AM, Marcel Offermans wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2011, at 6:54 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>> On Dec 17, 2011, at 6:16 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>>> I think the Board might have an issue with the 'purpose' of the
>>>
First and foremost, thank you for providing comments, opinions and
insight on how we can all make Gora a better project @ ASF.
At this stage a change to either documentation or an opinion regarding
Apache Gora is fine, however I propose that as a community we were
should address the obvious concer
On Dec 18, 2011, at 6:54 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2011, at 6:16 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>> I think the Board might have an issue with the 'purpose' of the
>> project (I would if I was in the Board). The formulation
>>
>> " a Project Management Committee charged with the c