[VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

Hi, that is the second Release Candidate (the first Candidate was voted negative on the openmeetings dev mailing list and did not came that far) There was already a vote at the OpenMetings Dev mailing list. Results: PPMC: aaf +1 (mentor) solomax +1 eschwert +1 alvaro +1 Wider Community: 3 times

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

My Vote is +1 :) 2012/6/26 seba.wag...@gmail.com seba.wag...@gmail.com Hi, that is the second Release Candidate (the first Candidate was voted negative on the openmeetings dev mailing list and did not came that far) There was already a vote at the OpenMetings Dev mailing list. Results:

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

On 26 June 2012 10:55, seba.wag...@gmail.com seba.wag...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, that is the second Release Candidate (the first Candidate was voted negative on the openmeetings dev mailing list and did not came that far) There was already a vote at the OpenMetings Dev mailing list. Results:

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

@Sebb: Which of the Libraries do you think are duplicates? About License VS Notice file. From what I understood from http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-license The NOTICE document is for additional copyright and attribution statements those licenses may

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

On Jun 26, 2012, at 7:43 AM, seba.wag...@gmail.com wrote: @Sebb: Which of the Libraries do you think are duplicates? About License VS Notice file. From what I understood from http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-license The NOTICE document is for

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

On 26 June 2012 12:43, seba.wag...@gmail.com seba.wag...@gmail.com wrote: @Sebb: Which of the Libraries do you think are duplicates? bcprov commons-beanutils commons-codec commons-collections ehcache-core httpclient httpcore etc. Not as many as I thought at first glance, but still quite a lot.

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

Thanks for the feedback and review so far! About correct attribution of ASF JARs Do they need a reference in the LICENSE file at all ? Must the name of the JAR file be _exactly_ mentioned in the LICENSE file? For example:

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

On 26 June 2012 13:28, seba.wag...@gmail.com seba.wag...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the feedback and review so far! About correct attribution of ASF JARs Do they need a reference in the LICENSE file at all ? The recipient of the package needs to be able to quickly find the license associated

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenMeetings 2.0-incubating (Candidate 2)

On Jun 26, 2012, at 9:40 AM, sebb wrote: On 26 June 2012 13:28, seba.wag...@gmail.com seba.wag...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the feedback and review so far! About correct attribution of ASF JARs Do they need a reference in the LICENSE file at all ? The recipient of the package needs to

[VOTE] Apache Stanbol Entityhub 0.10.0-incubating

Hi, please vote for releasing Apache Stanbol 0.10.0-incubating (RC3). This release has already passed the PPMC vote [1] with +1 : 4 votes (including 3 PPMC votes and 1 IPMC vote) 0 : 0 votes -1 : 0 votes So, we need at least 2 more votes from IPMC members. [1]

Re: [VOTE] Apache Stanbol Entityhub 0.10.0-incubating

On 26 June 2012 16:26, Fabian Christ christ.fab...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, please vote for releasing Apache Stanbol 0.10.0-incubating (RC3). This release has already passed the PPMC vote [1] with +1 : 4 votes (including 3 PPMC votes and 1 IPMC vote)  0 : 0 votes -1 : 0 votes So, we

Re: [VOTE] Apache Stanbol Entityhub 0.10.0-incubating

+1 Apologies, I intended to vote as a mentor, I'd actually done the checks and then... (you know the rest) On 26 June 2012 16:26, Fabian Christ christ.fab...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi, please vote for releasing Apache Stanbol 0.10.0-incubating (RC3). This release has already passed the PPMC

Re: [VOTE] Apache Stanbol Entityhub 0.10.0-incubating

2012/6/26 sebb seb...@gmail.com: Where is the SVN tag for the release? Here are the SVN tags. - source-assembly-0.10.0-incubating tag: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/stanbol/tags/source-assembly-0.10.0-incubating - stanbol-parent-1-incubating tag:

[VOTE] Retire Kato

Based on the status of this podling as reported in the June board report, I propose that the IPMC retire the Kato podling. I'm not sure how long a vote for this should remain open. here is my +1. - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [VOTE] Retire Kato

+1 binding Regards, Alan On Jun 26, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: Based on the status of this podling as reported in the June board report, I propose that the IPMC retire the Kato podling. I'm not sure how long a vote for this should remain open. here is my +1.

Re: [VOTE] Retire Kato

+1 binding -- dims On Jun 26, 2012, at 7:20 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote: +1 binding Regards, Alan On Jun 26, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: Based on the status of this podling as reported in the June board report, I propose that the IPMC retire the

Re: [VOTE] Retire Kato

+1 - Original Message - From: Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com To: general@incubator.apache.org Cc: Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 7:29 PM Subject: [VOTE] Retire Kato Based on the status of this podling as reported in the June board report, I propose that the IPMC retire

Re: [VOTE] Retire Kato

+1 Craig On Jun 26, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: Based on the status of this podling as reported in the June board report, I propose that the IPMC retire the Kato podling. I'm not sure how long a vote for this should remain open. here is my +1.