Hi Folks,
This VOTE has passed with the following tallies:
+1
Chris Mattmann*
Andy Seaborne* ^
Simone Tripodi
Jukka Zitting* ^
Tomaaso Teofili* ^
Dave Meikle
Oleg Tikhonov
Paul Ramirez*
Prescott Nasser
Szymon Danielcyzk
Lewis John McGibbney
Key:
* - IPMC member per
http://people.apache.org/co
Rob Weir:
> You probably don't see this on the server yet, but end-user operating
> systems, both desktop and devices, both at OS level as well as in
> browsers and with antivirus software, are shifting over to excluding
> non-signed executable by default. This is equally true of software
> distri
FYI,
Ongoing optional community vote in checking for graduation readiness.
Cheers,
Suresh
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Suresh Marru
> Subject: [VOTE] Apache Airavata Community is ready for graduation?
> Date: August 27, 2012 3:26:07 PM EDT
> To: Airavata Dev
> Bcc: Suresh Marru
>
> Hi A
great, thanks! :-)
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Joe Schaefer >wrote:
> >
> >> Many projects in a similar situation ship a "deps"
> >> package that contains dependencies and distribute
> >> those from the mirrors.
>
> On Mon, Au
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>
>> Many projects in a similar situation ship a "deps"
>> package that contains dependencies and distribute
>> those from the mirrors.
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez
wrote:
> ...can you give one project which ha
I'll have a look at it, thanks!
br,
juan pablo
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> You can also use OSSRH to push more jars to central.
>
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Joe Schaefer
> wrote:
> > Many projects in a similar situation ship a "deps"
> > package that conta
Hi Joe,
thanks for the insight :-)
can you give one project which has done this?, just to have a look at it
and have this done the right way from the beggining. Are there any special
requirements for these jars in order to be able to distribute them from
mirrors (i.e.: being signed with a key cor
You can also use OSSRH to push more jars to central.
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Many projects in a similar situation ship a "deps"
> package that contains dependencies and distribute
> those from the mirrors.
>
> HTH
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> From
Many projects in a similar situation ship a "deps"
package that contains dependencies and distribute
those from the mirrors.
HTH
>
> From: Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez
>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 2:42 PM
>Subject: downloadi
Hello,
As a part of JSPWiki's July 2012 incubator report [#1], it was noted that
JSPWiki (incubating) should not ship external jars alongside with code.
This has been achieved in current trunk. However, as part of AOO community
graduation vote thread [#2] it was noted that:
" If you try to build
+1.
On Aug 27, 2012, at 1:07 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> Which better agrees with written policy anyway- the sigs
> are part of the release package to be voted on and voted on
> by the PMC, so even tho it constitutes individual sigs
> those sigs (well at least the RM's sig) are PMC-approved.
>
>
Which better agrees with written policy anyway- the sigs
are part of the release package to be voted on and voted on
by the PMC, so even tho it constitutes individual sigs
those sigs (well at least the RM's sig) are PMC-approved.
- Original Message -
> From: Greg Stein
> To: general@in
On Aug 27, 2012 9:57 AM, "Jim Jagielski" wrote:
>...
> But recall in all this that even when the PMC releases code, it is
> signed by the individual RM, and not by the PMC itself.
Apache Subversion releases tend to have a half-dozen signatures. Thus, I'd
say they are signed by the PMC. For exampl
Suresh Marru created PODLINGNAMESEARCH-14:
-
Summary: Establish Whether "Apache Airavata" would be a Suitable
Name
Key: PODLINGNAMESEARCH-14
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-14
Jim Jagielski wrote on Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 10:38:15 -0400:
> After this, please drop general@
>
> On Aug 27, 2012, at 10:16 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> >>
> >> A signature does 2 things:
> >>
> >> 1. Ensures that no bits have been changed
> >> 2. That the bits come from a known (and trusted) en
- Original Message -
> From: Benson Margulies
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 9:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote
>
> Jim,
>
> Two points:
>
> 1: you skip over the liability question. Is Bill legally expose
After this, please drop general@
On Aug 27, 2012, at 10:16 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> A signature does 2 things:
>>
>> 1. Ensures that no bits have been changed
>> 2. That the bits come from a known (and trusted) entity.
>>
>
> Almost. It doesn't guarantee trust.
Sure it does. If somethin
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Re adding ooo-dev@ since this is STILL an AOO issue.
>
> On Aug 27, 2012, at 9:38 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 27, 2012, at 8:56 AM, donald_harbi...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>>>
Re adding ooo-dev@ since this is STILL an AOO issue.
On Aug 27, 2012, at 9:38 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 27, 2012, at 8:56 AM, donald_harbi...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, that's what end users care about. But it's not sufficient
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Aug 27, 2012 6:15 AM, "Jukka Zitting" wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm jumping in late to this discussion after returning from vacation.
>> To summarize my understanding:
>>
>> * As Joe says, there's no problem with current OpenOffice releases.
>
There are, as many have pointed out, two issues. The first is, can AOO do
what it is doing - the answer to this one is yes and has been clearly
expressed a number of times in this thread. The second is whether AOO can
go a step further than what it is already doing. The answer to this is No,
as has
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:56 AM, wrote:
> Jim Jagielski wrote on 08/27/2012 08:43:35 AM:
>
>> From: Jim Jagielski
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org, Joe Schaefer
>> , Rob Weir ,
>> Cc: "ooo-...@incubator.apache.org"
>> Date: 08/27/2012 08:44 AM
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Commun
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2012, at 8:56 AM, donald_harbi...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>>
>> Yes, that's what end users care about. But it's not sufficient for AOO
>> since we are seeking alternative distribution channels.
>
> What does that mean? Can I grok "alte
On 27.08.2012 13:10, Greg Stein wrote:
On Aug 27, 2012 6:15 AM, "Jukka Zitting" wrote:
Hi,
I'm jumping in late to this discussion after returning from vacation.
To summarize my understanding:
* As Joe says, there's no problem with current OpenOffice releases.
Agreed.
* The project is loo
On Aug 27, 2012, at 9:16 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
> But can't you drag this whole matter back to the AOO list, being a
> mentor and all?
>
Trying to do that with ccing ooo-dev@
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr
Jim,
Two points:
1: you skip over the liability question. Is Bill legally exposed?
2: You can't distribute a binary application to the Mac App store, or
other places, without a signature.
Some complex requirements for using an Apache signature have been
posed; I don't know why Donald characteri
On Aug 27, 2012, at 8:56 AM, donald_harbi...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>
> Yes, that's what end users care about. But it's not sufficient for AOO
> since we are seeking alternative distribution channels.
What does that mean? Can I grok "alternative distribution channels"
as "more mirrors" or something
Jim Jagielski wrote on 08/27/2012 08:43:35 AM:
> From: Jim Jagielski
> To: general@incubator.apache.org, Joe Schaefer
> , Rob Weir ,
> Cc: "ooo-...@incubator.apache.org"
> Date: 08/27/2012 08:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote
>
>
> On Aug 26, 2012, at 1
On Aug 26, 2012, at 10:26 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> No. There is NO WAY IN HELL the org can indemnify
> a volunteer who produces a binary build themselves.
>
> Please don't bother asking legal-discuss to tackle this.
>
Here's an analogy: for a long, long time Bill Rowe has taken
it upon hims
The ASF releases source code. We produce it, we develop it, we license it
and we release it.
We have also, as a courtesy to the community, released binaries (read: pre-
compiled and built s/w) as well. The binaries MUST be based on
the actual released code. But the s/w itself is what is produced a
On Aug 27, 2012 6:15 AM, "Jukka Zitting" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm jumping in late to this discussion after returning from vacation.
> To summarize my understanding:
>
> * As Joe says, there's no problem with current OpenOffice releases.
Agreed.
> * The project is looking for ways to produce "bless
Hi,
I'm jumping in late to this discussion after returning from vacation.
To summarize my understanding:
* As Joe says, there's no problem with current OpenOffice releases.
* The project is looking for ways to produce "blessed binaries" as a
part of future releases, and has been working with the
On 26.08.2012 00:21, Greg Stein wrote:
On Aug 25, 2012 9:46 AM, "Benson Margulies" wrote:
...
Of course, a discussion thread started here to solicit the IPMC's
opinion on graduation would be another matter entirely.
If Rob is representative of AOO, then no. They need more time to learn
about
33 matches
Mail list logo
