This thread started as a discussion of Linux distros and trademarks.
Perhaps I could try to return it there?
If a distro takes a release of Apache X, compiles it with minimal changes
that adapt it to the environment, and distributes it, I believe that it's a
fine thing for them to call it simple A
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Coming in late.
>
> A snapshot is not a release. Licenses "kick in" at distribution/
> release.
Are you sure? When you have a public source control repo, with a
LICENSE file at the top, I would think that this counts as a legal
'publication'
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Gregory Chase wrote:
> Does "...based on Apache Hadoop" require a clear dependency notation as to
> which versions of Apache component releases are part of the commercial
> distribution?
No, it cannot. Trademark law is not a matter of such distinctions, and
our ve
With the graduation of NiFi I depart, at least for now.
Thanks for all the fish.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
I've used crucible. It's horrible. And it comes from Atlassian, which
means that infra@ is predisposed against it, as their general feeling
is that the Atlassian products are very heavy.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr.
Sean sure makes more sense than me.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Joe Witt wrote:
> Sean is one of those folks i referred to. Id be an easy +1
> On Jun 12, 2015 9:24 AM, "Andrew Purtell" wrote:
>
>> As Sean says he's been engaged with the project while acting as mentor,
>> IMHO beyond mento
Writing as a member and a mentor, I think that the NiFi podling will
do fine without the 'usual' ASF member that Bertrand is asking about.
However, because I think they'll do fine, I'll sign up if it makes
people more comfy, secure in my belief that I will be a maytag
repairman.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2
I submitted the form, but I then need to replace myself with tkurc as a
mod. Can I do that sans-jira?
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Joe Witt wrote:
> Gavin,
>
> Appreciate your help. I am doing exactly what you asked and following
> the trail of guidance.
>
> Thanks
> Joe
>
> On Fri, Apr 1
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:22 AM, James Carman
wrote:
> And that covers us from a legal standpoint? Is there anything
> "special"' about this situation that makes this appropriate?
There is nothing legal to cover here. Since all the code is AL 2.0,
legally, we are fine. The grant is (a) a bit of
If a single legal entity has the copyright, the entity makes a grant.
If the code was built by a large community under the apache license,
there's no one to make a grant. 'The community' expressing its desire
to move to Apache is enough. This is an edge case of the principle
that we only accept cod
You may think that the discussion has died down, but perhaps recall
the lesson of NiFi. Or not, it might not strike you as applicable.
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
>>... Starting the vote on the propos
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Steve Loughran wrote:
Perhaps you might consider asking Maven questions on a Maven list? If
you peruse the Maven dev list, you'll find an ongoing conversation.
>
>> On 14 Mar 2015, at 00:13, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>>
>> Am 13.03.2015 22:38, schrieb Stephen Con
JimJag, for years, has written about the cultural implications of
DVCS, and the email here supports what he's written. So I think we
need to pay close attention.
I think that we care about both PMC and committer inventory. I, for
one, would not want to see an Apache project that restricted commit
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > At this point, I would like to open this document for soliciting as
> > wide a feedback as possible. I would like to especially request
> > attention of the ASF board members who ask
An Apache project may not manage a codebase outside of Apache. Some people
who happen to be members of an Apache community can maintain code outside
of Apache, if they are very clear in distinguishing; it must not be a
product of the project. See 'Apache Extras'.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Je
Since the only official release is the source release, perhaps that's
the only place where we in fact need a policy?
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:39 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes
> wrote:
>
>> I think formally the requirement is just that there is
m/tinkerpop/tinkerpop3/graphs/contributors
>
>
>
> On 02/02/2015 09:53 AM, Matt Franklin wrote:
>>
>> On Mon Feb 02 2015 at 8:09:43 AM Hadrian Zbarcea
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/01/2015 03:19 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 5:38 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I missed a few important points in this thread last week, with which I
> disagree:
>
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> ...1) Draft a template resolution. Starting in the wiki is fine, but you'll
>> want to
On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 2:12 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Sun Feb 01 2015 at 1:05:10 AM Alex Harui wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 1/31/15, 9:09 AM, "Benson Margulies" wrote:
>>
>> >On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt Franklin
>> > wrote
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Matt Franklin
wrote:
> On Sat Jan 31 2015 at 11:22:15 AM Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 10:55 AM, James Carman
>> wrote:
>> > Are there guidelines for these "usual considerations"?
>>
&g
granting
a license, but we also require that code that 'moves into' Apache some
with some expression of positive intent on the part of the
author/copyright owner.
>
> On Saturday, January 31, 2015, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:44 AM, James C
On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 8:44 AM, James Carman
wrote:
> Is there a "standard" within the incubator about how we go about
> getting the appropriate forms filled out when we want to incubate a
> project from GitHub? GitHub fosters a sort of fly-by contribution
> model (and that's a good thing), but
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 6:05 PM, jan i wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> I am a bit confused about the mangling of license/notice files in respect
> of the source/binary releases.
>
> Can I please ask you to make a clear distinction between source and binary
> (which is not official ASF release) in the ne
+1 (binding)
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> I checked (for both release artefacts):
> - signatures and hashes all good
> - incubating in source package name
> - LICENSE and NOTICE good (but complex!)
> - NOTICE has correct year
> - no unexpected b
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Alan D. Cabrera
>> wrote:
>>> In short, the pTLP designation is a bit too opaque
>>
>> So you mean all TLPs should have status labels
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> There are a few things that I would suggest for "next steps":
>
> 1) Draft a template resolution. Starting in the wiki is fine, but you'll
> want to involve board@ when you have your first draft done. This will also
> start the discussion among
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> ...They are reporting to the Board. We know what inactivity looks like. So we
>> ask the PMC to fix it, or we shut them down
>
> I know how that works, it's just that with your
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> On Jan 21, 2015, at 3:39 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 4:03 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
>>>
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 4:03 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:38 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
>> bdelacre...@apache.org > wrote:
>>> How is that different from pruning the current IPMC membership by
>>> removing inac
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 20.01.2015 17:16, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>> I agree with Bertrand. Note whoever commits the patch is doing so under
>> their ICLA.
>
> Really? That can't be right: one can't become the author of a change
> (and therefore can't
I'm in the odd situation of not particularly wanting to argue in favor
of the proposal I wrote, yet finding it hard to resist the provocation
of messages that appear, to me, to misunderstand it. So I'll restrict
myself to the following, and I won't reply to any further dispute.
Anyone else is welco
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> Relating to IncubatorV2 and pTLP proposals - on Apache Commons I seem
> to have spurred a discussion about making sub-mailing lists (And thus
> forming sub-communities) - but keep the formalities on the general
> list.
>
> (email below
On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 10:43 AM, David Nalley wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Doug Cutting wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Roman Shaposhnik
> wrote:
> >> I think a better analogy would be "US Culture". Yes it is as nebulous
> >> as it gets, but the fact that US Constitut
Does it help anything to look at this, again, as failure modes?
One failure mode is a project that emerges from the incubator showing,
well, gross signs that it 'doesn't get it.'
Another failure mode is that a group of people who really do get it, at the
level of the broad principles, get into tr
The temperature of this might be reduced by replacing, 'no one knows what
the Apache Way is' with 'a lot of us have trouble translate it into
practical decisions in a repeatable fashion.' Or not.
As reported here, we have performed multiple experiments in which multiple
members, directors, and oth
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) <
ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> To be clear my email was not targeted at Marvin. We all know how hard
> Marvin has worked to create the clear policy documents I talk about here. I
> hope Marvin knows me well enough to recognize my
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) <
ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Chip is correct. The tools we use in board meetings make it easy for us to
> see how many PMC members in a TLP resolution are members. If there are not
> enough we will sometimes put the project on a
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) <
ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> WTF? There have been presentations about the apache way at every ApacheCon
> for about 15 years (twice in most years). I personally give 5-10 such
> presentations a year (sometimes public sometimes
Back in 2013, I suggested asking the Champion to accept a very clear
level of reporting responsibility: to write a sentence or two _every
month_ or find someone else to do it. That's one person whom I wanted
to ask to sign up, for the duration of an incubation, to pay enough
attention to be able to
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
> On Jan 5, 2015, at 7:04 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Benson Margulies
>>> wrote
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> ...This scheme locates
>> that responsibility in the renamed committee, which serves the board
>> by supervising the pTLPs. They aren't
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 8:41 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 5, 2015, at 5:38 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
>
>>>> On Jan 5, 2015, at 4:20 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For your reading and wrangling pleasure, I offer:
For your reading and wrangling pleasure, I offer:
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorV2.
The goal of this exercise is to turn the idea of the pTLP into a
practical alternative. By 'practical', I mean: 'based on the
constraints as I see them'; the board and comdev are not going to find
a li
Marvin,
I did go away. I came back to help with a podling, and fell into a
conversation started by discontented board members. You might push
back on the board, formally, and challenge them to either officially
be discontented or leave the iPMC alone. Me, I have an idea for a
proposal that might m
I'd like to raise a topic directly related to the succession. To
start, three cheers for Roman for all his hard work!
For all other projects in the Foundation, we say, 'The chair is just a
clerk who facilitates communications with the board.' Here at the
IPMC, we expect the chair to be moderator o
mmenting on this thread to focus on it would
>> > be that: arguing for potential downsides.
>> >
>> > With that, I'd like to thank all of my IPMC colleagues for
>> > this great opportunity and wish all of you the Happiest
>> > New Year!
>> >
Every PMC member of a running PMC has a responsibility to keep an eye
out for crazy commits. Once this is reflected in the doc, it's good
practice for PPMC members.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 12:27 PM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed Dec 31 2
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980)
wrote:
> +1 to everything Ross said below and I monitored that experiment
> as well but was unaware of the 3 incidents, etc.
>
> As for pTLPs and shifting mentorship, etc., I trust Ross’s judgement
> but think we need more data on this acro
ience Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Benson Margulies
> Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org"
> Date: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 at 11:12 AM
> To:
I plan to:
1. Ask the nifi community if they want to be experimental subjects. Can't
expect IRB approval without it.
2. Write a proposal for the board to read. There are a number of details to
worry over. Any suggestions about where to put it? There in no board wiki.
Is there?
3. Submit a board
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Please note the change of subject.
>
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>> On 12/19/2014 02:20 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) wrote:
>>>
>>> What it would do however if we simply did away with the notion of the
>>> IPMC/In
I'd like to look at this through a lens of failure analysis. How do
podlings fail? I see two main patterns.
1. Failure to build a community. These are the podlings that we find
adrift in space with the lights on but no one home on the mailing
list.
2. Failure to build an _Apache_ community. These
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 6:09 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
> Are we top posting now?
>
> My comments below Ross’
>
>
>> On 19 Dec 2014, at 16:33, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>>
>> As a participant, I have two concerns about a player-mentor requirement.
>>
>> 1. Sustainability. In many ways, it is
Back when I was trying to be the chair of this operation, we (ChrisM &
I & others) had a lovely old food fight about Chris M's proposal. It
seems to me that the fundamental situation as I saw it remains: this
is a proposal to the board to dissolve the IPMC and replace it with
something else. And ju
Apache PMCs, including the incubator PMC, operate by consensus except
in a very small number of enumerated exceptional cases. So, the vote,
I think, is a test of consensus. -1 votes block consensus until
discussed to 0. There's no minimum number of +1 votes.
I am always prepared to be corrected.
ms build type' option?
>> >>>
>> >>> Drew
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Drew Farris
>> >>> drew.far...@gmail.com
>> >>> d...@apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> &g
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 6:13 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> https://infra.apache.org/officers/webreq
I tried:
Missing https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tamaya/site/index.html
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@i
I'll repair my work on the metadata.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:35 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Group 2 is for groups podlings that started in months such as
> November. First report would be December.
>
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:30 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>>
Starting with a December report makes sense. So, group changes too.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:27 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:18 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> Oh, that was not my smartest moment. Should I change the xml file to
>> move out a mo
Oh, that was not my smartest moment. Should I change the xml file to
move out a month? I don't think we've got something worth reporting.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 9:14 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>> One message he
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> I suspect that only Roman and other VPs can do this.
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html seems to be claiming
the contrary.
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
> On Nov 25, 2014, at 10:23 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Does anyon
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 6:24 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 24, 2014, at 1:49 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>>> Following http://incubator.apache.org/guides/website.html, I ran 'ant' (and
One message here to make progress in public before we have NiFi mailing lists:
I've added nifi to podlings.xml and I've created nifi.xml.
I've opened INFRA-8706 for the mailing lists.
I plan to write one other JIRA for a git repo; after that, we need
discussion on the list to be sure of what we
Following http://incubator.apache.org/guides/website.html, I ran 'ant' (and
also build.sh) after adding nifi to podlings.xml and added the nifi.xml
fille. It didn't produce any changed files to commit.
Is the guide behind? Am I confused?
The vote for NiFi incubation has passed. I will go start turning cranks.
Nonbinding +1:
Sean Busaby
Brock Noland
Ryan Blue
Joey Echeverria
Binding +1:
Tim Williams
Chris Mattmann
Suresh Srinivas
Chris Douglas
John D Ament
Benson Margulies
Jake Farrell
Andrew Purtell
Bertrand Delacretaz
tup to Github through INFRA. We request
sponsor Benson Margulies (bimargulies) to assist with creating the
INFRA ticket for this.
=== Issue Tracking ===
JIRA Ni``Fi (NIFI)
=== Initial Committers ===
* Brandon De``Vries , CLA confirmed
* Jason Carey , CLA submitted
* Matt Gilman , CLA confi
n Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 1:55 PM, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
>
> > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NiFiProposal has elicited a cheerful
> and
> > positive conversation, so I offer this vote.
> >
> > Vote will be open for the usual 72 hours ...
> >
> > Here is my [+1]
> >
>
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NiFiProposal has elicited a cheerful and
positive conversation, so I offer this vote.
Vote will be open for the usual 72 hours ...
Here is my [+1]
I've advised Joe to 'asterix' the would-be mentors who are not iPMC yet, so
that he can proceed to a vote on the base of the ones who are sooner rather
than later, and the stragglers can be formally added to the metadata once
they are on the iPMC.
We will be rapidly expanding the
> > > >available documentation to cover things like installation, developer
> > > >guide, frequently asked questions, best practices, and more. This
> > > >documentation will be posted to the NiFi wiki at apache.org.
> > > >
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#initial-provenance
has some svn specific commentary. If an incoming podling has a git
repo, can it just be pushed into place as the starting point?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-
On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 2:07 PM, jan i wrote:
> On 24 August 2014 19:54, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 24, 2014, at 10:51 AM, Alan D. Cabrera
>> wrote:
>>
>> >>> I am not so sure if its worth while with the board report.
>> >
>> > What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Having
Everyone who has ever mentored anything is a member of this PMC,
except for those who have actually chosen to depart.
In addition, we have PMC members who specialize in things like NOTICE
files, but don't choose to mentor individual projects.
In general, there is a mentor shortage. If you have a
During my, uh, tenure, as chair, I was unable to find any evidence of
any actual work applied to IP clearance by the PMC as a group. People
would post them up for lazy consensus, and the consensus, as far as
any email evidence went, was in fact completely lazy. Is there
anything this group wants to
If you can work out a plan to do this directly in Hadoop, there's no
need for the incubator. You just build and and contribute it in
cahoots with them, and earn commit over there as you go.
On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:
> Mmmh, if i recall correctly this has come up i
If the student provides it as a patch, then you are asking the usual
question about the quantity of code. There is no hard and fast rule,
but unless it's very large, the AL is very clear; patches sent to
mailing lists or attached to issue tracking systems or any of that are
covered by the AL. If th
>
> Therefore, when we say that incubating releases "can have small IP loose
> ends", we mean:
>
> * This is an official release, created by an act of the Foundation.
> * It is known to violate policy.
> * It could be removed, but no one has done so yet.
>
> I'm comfortable with relying on "p
My understanding is that incubating releases can have small IP loose
ends, but not that they can proceed before the main clearance of an
initial code donation.
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 6:14 AM, Bernd Fondermann
> wrote:
>
>> That was also m
meone something at a point when they have some appreciation of what
> they are joining, no?
>
> Upayavira
>
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013, at 01:24 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>> Joining a PMC does not meaning being handed even one of the keys to
>> the launch console for a nucl
Joining a PMC does not meaning being handed even one of the keys to
the launch console for a nuclear missile. Joining a PMC means
accepting responsibility for the supervision of a project. We vote to
add someone to a PMC when they have shown the necessary commitment
and, well, common sense. Part of
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Joseph Schaefer
wrote:
> Unlikely to get at least Roy’s approval because release
> votes are expected to be a decision of the full committee,
> not any one member of it.
+1: Much as some people here as in favor of dismantlement, and others
would like to see some
A summarized agreement with this thread:
The bottom line, I think, is that _someone_ has to provide the
supervision that the board delegates to a PMC.
The virtue of the 'demolish the incubator' proposal is that it makes
that point absolutely clear. If there were no incubator, the board
would need
I think that all of this might boil down to the observation, way back
in this thread, that there are different patterns of incoming
projects.
Some incoming podlings are very small groups of people. If they are
paying attention, they know that attracting new people will be their
biggest problem. In
; created that will appear in the next release.
>
> Given that
>
> * the disclaimer is actually there,
>
> * this is a milestone release which should be supplanted by another release
> in a month or two
>
> and
>
> * this will be fixed
>
> Would you reconside
-1 binding. I don't see the standard disclaimer in any of the possible
locations.
In Maven, the standard disclaimer as a remote resource via
org.apache:apache-incubator-disclaimer-resource-bundle.
The text looks like:
#if(${projectName})${projectName}#else${project.name}#end is an effort
undergo
A simple alternative is 'expectation'. However, I have no problem with
using it the way Joe wrote it.
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> I did read the topmatter, but I still felt it was a concern. It's not
> just about mentors, that was just one example of a potential proble
A paradox:
The VP is not supposed to exercise authority in normal circumstances.
Projects are supposed to have mentors that advocate for them. If a
project comes 'to the ombudsman', whether that's the VP or not, what
can this person do? All they can do is bring the matter to the
community. If it's
Incubator community,
I have tendered my resignation as VP, Incubator. The PMC has recommend
Marvin Humphrey as my successor in a motion submitted to the
Foundation board for consideration at the meeting next week.
--benson
-
To
I'm off by a week. No buttoning until next week.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> I'll button it up in the middle of tomorrow some time.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: gen
I'll button it up in the middle of tomorrow some time.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
I think that the RM _must_ have a key, that the key must be part of a
KEYS file in svn/git, and that it _should_ be uploaded into their
Apache account, and it is more better if it is signed into the GWOT
(global web of trust).
-
T
In fact, someone from Wales wants to rename them to be pronounced 'pothling'.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
A straw poll: how many people on this PMC scrutinized any of the
recent three IP clearance transactions?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.ap
If you look at proposals and email, you will notice that several
people who disagree on many things agree that this group has trouble
making decisions by consensus, due to size, diversity, and perhaps
sheer orneriness.
One possibility is to focus on the ideas in Bertrand's document that
address de
Also please remember that every release is supposed to go into the
next month's board report.
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Alan Cabrera wrote:
> Sebb you are awesome and correct.
>
> But I have to say, I think that when we make suggestions to podlings, we
> should make it clear that we are
Chris,
As I feel like I've explained 100 times, all of the following are true:
1) I disagree with your proposal
2) I agree with much of your analyses of problems with the IPMC
3) I I trying to do a job of consensus moderation as best I understand
how, being fair to you and to all the involuntary
>
> If you think it's clear in either direction, call a VOTE. I think that's
> the only demonstrable way to suggest what's clear and what's not.
Please see several emails from Greg and others on the board@ list
recently pointing out the inappropriateness of overuse of votes.
If even *one* person
Violating my 24 hour rule just this one, and worse yet to repeat myself:
+1 Joe, Ross, etc.
I rather regret mentioning the direct launch alternative in my most
recent email. We have some weakness in _mentoring_, and more weakness
in _supervising_ (or at least in documenting supervision). We have
I'm not going to ask the May board meeting anything. There's no
consensus of this community on 'probationary projects', and, more to
the point, there are a host of details required to make that a viable
proposal and no one has filled them in. As I wrote in the report, I
plan to have a discussion wi
; On May 10, 2013, at 9:21 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>> I wrote some text at the front. I plan to fill in things like PMC
>> members coming and going tomorrow morning, and commit to svn.
>>
>> -
1 - 100 of 697 matches
Mail list logo
