On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 4:52 PM, David Jencks
david_jen...@yahoo.com.invalid wrote:
I thought the more-up-to-date version of the backport stuff was here:
http://backport-jsr166.sourceforge.net/
Looks like there was no activity on this project since 2007.
david jencks
On Mar 21, 2015, at
Hi.
Sorry could not resist the subject line, but fact is I need a good advice.
I know our rulebook about including 3rd party libraries, but rules are open
to interpretation, and since I am involved in the development I consider my
opinion for biased.
In Corinthia we depend on the following third
On Sunday, March 22, 2015, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org
wrote:
Hi,
In the recent discussions about provisional TLPs and direct-to-TLP
projects we're missing a public place where the proposals (board
resolutions etc) for such projects are discussed and worked on.
Are people ok
Am 22.03.2015 00:09, schrieb Marvin Humphrey:
[...]
Because release candidate and RC are specialized terms with
precise meaning at Apache and because we make a strong legal
distinction between released and unreleased code, this is
extremely confusing. Having something named RC which is also an
I am very much in favor for provisional TLP's and direct-to-TLP's here at the
Apache Software Foundation.
With that said I am very much against the noise here on our incubator lists and
wiki. We should really create a list in the wiki for this kind of endeavor. It
really it should take place
Le 22/03/15 11:04, Jochen Theodorou a écrit :
Am 22.03.2015 00:09, schrieb Marvin Humphrey:
[...]
Because release candidate and RC are specialized terms with
precise meaning at Apache and because we make a strong legal
distinction between released and unreleased code, this is
extremely
Hi,
In the recent discussions about provisional TLPs and direct-to-TLP
projects we're missing a public place where the proposals (board
resolutions etc) for such projects are discussed and worked on.
Are people ok with using this list and the Incubator wiki for those things?
The Incubator PMC
My only concern is confusion over pTLP and incubator. That's a manageable
concern but this lost is so large I fear it might keep recurring.
Just a word of caution, not an objection.
Sent from my Windows Phone
From: jan imailto:j...@apache.org
Sent: 3/22/2015
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 6:16 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote:
My only concern is confusion over pTLP and incubator. That's a manageable
concern but this lost is so large I fear it might keep recurring.
Just a word of caution, not an objection.
I agree that
Considering the members-only nature of pTLP, it probably makes sense.
John
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 12:40 PM Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:
Would moving this to members make this a members-only conversation?
-Original Message-
From: Alan Cabrera
Would moving this to members make this a members-only conversation?
-Original Message-
From: Alan Cabrera [mailto:l...@toolazydogs.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 22, 2015 07:33
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [POLL] Using this list to discuss pTLP proposals, ok?
I am very much
On Mar 22, 2015, at 9:32 AM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
My preference would be to ask pTLP advocates which public list they want to
use. Creating a new public mailing list is an option, though the low
visibility of a new list makes such an option less than ideal and the
Le 22/03/15 00:09, Marvin Humphrey a écrit :
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
dsetrak...@apache.org wrote:
We wanted to have community to play with the RC3 release for a bit until we
release the final 1.0 release in a week or two.
Because release candidate and RC are
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 10:01 PM, Branko Čibej br...@apache.org wrote:
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html says, on the topic of GPL and
similar:
Apache projects cannot distribute any such components. However, if
the component is only needed for optional features, a project can
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 5:06 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 10:01 PM, Branko Čibej br...@apache.org wrote:
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html says, on the topic of GPL and
similar:
Apache projects cannot distribute any such
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
dsetrak...@apache.org wrote:
I think Ignite does not pose a problem here because it does not have any
GPL dependencies, optional or not. The only classes in question were the
Doug Lee's JSR 166 classes, which I think we already agreed belong
Hi Everyone,
I am pleased to submit for consideration to the Apache Incubator
the Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer proposal. We are actively
soliciting interested mentors in this project related to climate
science and analytics and big data.
Please find the wiki text of the proposal below and
17 matches
Mail list logo
