Hi,
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
It is a week before the board meeting, but not a week before the
weekend before the board meeting.
No, quoting the last reminders from Marvin:
The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 16 January 2013,
Closing this vote after the 72 hour period.
The lazy consensus vote passes with no -1 having been cast.
This completes the IP clearance process for Apache UIMA TextMarker.
Thanks!
Peter
On 10.01.2013 10:40, Peter Klügl wrote:
Hi,
the TextMarker [1] project has been contributed to the
I want another ,5 weeks to grab another weekend
On Jan 14, 2013, at 3:14 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
It is a week before the board meeting, but not a week before the
weekend before the
wait, that was wrong
On Jan 14, 2013, at 3:14 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
It is a week before the board meeting, but not a week before the
weekend before the board meeting.
No,
Why would adding another formal role solve the problem that saw the
creation of shepherds (missing mentors)?
Are you tackling a different problem now?
Unless there is a really solid reason for it I would be concerned about
crating structure in the incubator that isn't present in the ASF proper.
Really is it so bad to say to a project with a bug in their license and
notice info:
fix this in trunk and show me the revision and I'll go ahead and approve your
release as-is.
Running through iterations of this is very labor-intensive for the project,
and
anything we can do to cut down
Thanks Andy!
What do you guys see as your key items that need to be done before you
graduate?
Looks like you guys are in critical need of some fresh mentors.
Regards,
Alan
On Jan 11, 2013, at 12:04 PM, Andy Konwinski wrote:
I've updated the wiki with the report text that Ben wrote.
Trust me, nobody here has any legal training either.
We're just more familiar with policy, not so much the
rationale behind it. And no I'm not saying this
kind of review is worthless, I'm just trying to
adjust priorities to better match reality- we can
provide this legal feedback in other ways
I don't think that it's up to the IPMC to decide that the legal
notices aren't worth getting right unless a corporate elephant decided
to trumpet about them. My view is that we, as a PMC, are responsible
for only shipping releases that meet some minimum standard. I am
trying to extract a
Apache Streams is looking to release its 0.1 Master POM. Given this
is our first release, I'd like to call attention to a mistake I've
made by inadvertently promoting the staged artifacts on Nexus before
the IPMC vote. We do have 4 IPMC members on our PPMC, however, I
realize that the IPMC
To begin with, I realize that I am tampering with the structure of the IPMC.
In some ways, the IPMC is just another project. It has members, they
are responsible for supervision of source control and releases. In
other ways, it's very different from the other projects. It's
responsible for
Frankly, having skeletons in the closet that a company like SCO could
exploit to try to kill an open source project like Linux *is* a big deal to
end users. They may not know about it until it bites them, but if and when
it does they will for darn sure care.
It isn't that big a deal to get this
On 12 January 2013 17:31, Simone Tripodi simonetrip...@apache.org wrote:
Hi all guys,
The Apache Onami PPMC voted for Apache Onami Parent 2-incubating[1]
which already collected 2 IPMC binding votes:
SVN source tag:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 8:27 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 January 2013 17:31, Simone Tripodi simonetrip...@apache.org wrote:
Hi all guys,
The Apache Onami PPMC voted for Apache Onami Parent 2-incubating[1]
which already collected 2 IPMC binding votes:
SVN source tag:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
...
The problem I'm looking at is indeed the chronic lack of reliable
mentor presence in the projects, as witnessed (maybe) by the signoff
statistics in January.
With shepherds you might spot problems and bring them
On Jan 14, 2013, at 12:33 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
...
The problem I'm looking at is indeed the chronic lack of reliable
mentor presence in the projects, as witnessed (maybe) by the signoff
statistics in
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:52 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
+Bundling Permissively-Licensed Dependencies
+===
+
+Bundling a dependency which is issued under one of the following licenses is
+straightforward, assuming that said license applies
On 14 January 2013 23:42, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:52 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
+Bundling Permissively-Licensed Dependencies
+===
+
+Bundling a dependency which is issued under one of the following
18 matches
Mail list logo
