he same as not having a community. Do you have such a community for
each of the log4X packages? One to "[take] over a project if and when the
need arises"?
--- Noel
--
Ceki Gülcü
The complete log4j manual: http://www.qos.ch/log4j/
---
FYI
List-Post: <mailto:general@incubator.apache.org>
List-Id:
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:27:38 +0100
To: general@incubator.apache.org
From: Ceki Gülcü <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: log4ne
,
[1] http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases%0D
[2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=11089248781&r=1&w=2
[3] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=11091988193&r=1&w=2
--
Ceki Gülcü
-
T
e:
Ceki,
I have reviewed http://incubator.apache.org/projects/log4cxx.html. If the
Logging PMC is taking responsibility, collectively, for maintaining this
codebase as part of the overall Logging project, I won't consider the small
number of committers worrisome.
--- Noel
--
Ceki Gülcü
he one I have linked to in all my previous mails.
OK. Thanks. I'll use that template.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
ish I had more
time to deal with this bureaucracy.
--
#kenP-)}
Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini http://Golux.Com/coar/
Author, developer, opinionist http://Apache-Server.Com/
"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
--
Ceki Gülcü
For log4j documentation consider "The complete log4
wrote:
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> It would helpful if the purpose of the Incubator was clarified. If
> it is an inspection tool, then it should not be disguised as a
> service.
Nutshell: the purpose of the Incubator is to help bring projects into the
ASF, while ensuring that the proper procedure
At 08:01 PM 1/13/2004 -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> It would helpful if the purpose of the Incubator was clarified. If
> it is an inspection tool, then it should not be disguised as a
> service.
Nutshell: the purpose of the Incubator is to help bring projects int
At 03:02 PM 1/12/2004 -0500, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
>
> Once the legal aspects are resolved, why adopt such a radical
> position? Is it warranted?
the resolution of the legal aspects is done by the incubator.
why don't restaurants perform their own heal
At 09:19 AM 1/12/2004 -0500, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
>
>>> From what I understand so far, I can't see any advantages for *log4net*
>>>to come through the Incubator instead of LS.
>>
>>http://incubator.apache.org/faq.html#does_p
At 11:49 AM 1/12/2004 +0100, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
...
From what I understand so far, I can't see any advantages for *log4net*
to come through the Incubator instead of LS.
http://incubator.apache.org/faq.html#does_project_X_really_need_Incubation
http://incubator.apach
nity cannot be imposed
from above. The project needs time to evolve naturally.
--- Noel
--
Ceki Gülcü
For log4j documentation consider "The complete log4j manual"
ISBN: 2970036908 http://www.qos.ch/shop/products/clm_t.jsp
-
en to
http://incubator.apache.org/axion, then to http://db.apache.org/axion, all
in a matter of weeks. What does all this disruption buy for us?
--
Ceki Gülcü
For log4j documentation consider "The complete log4j manual"
ISBN: 2970036908 http://www.qos.ch/shop/pro
At 10:32 AM 12/20/2003 -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> > Ceki, in our search for a much smoother way to do things, we have
devised
> > the concept of a PPMC. This is an entity under the Incubator PMC that
> > consists of the Incubator PMC members, the project
Noel,
How about if we had a single list: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]," consisting
of at least one Incubator PMC member, all Logging Services
PMC members, and developers from the incoming projects to be
incubated?
At 12:57 PM 12/19/2003 -0500, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> We are
Hello,
We are looking for a member of the Incubator project to help the
Logging Services project to incubate some of the log4j sister projects
originating from outside the ASF. Are there any volunteers?
--
Ceki Gülcü
For log4j documentation consider "The complete log4j manual"
At 02:54 PM 9/18/2003 -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Without a clear sense of responsibility, the end result
are that podlings are essentially left on their own and
"every" Incubator member thinks someone else is
doing the oversight. :/
I think Jim makes a good point.
--
Ceki Gülcü
Tetsuya,
From an architectural perspective, I think the logging component should
delegate i8n support to a specialized component. So it makes sense for
log4j to rely on "i18n" TLP project although more information on the
"i18n" project is needed to pursue the discussion.
Where can I find more
Hello,
I have received a request from Sacha Labourey (from the JBoss group) to
review the existing code in our J2EE project to check whether there any IP
issues with respect to the JBoss group. Sounds like a reasonable request to
me. Are we ready to allow this, and if not, why not?
Please note
Given the legal uncertainties related to our J2EE project, allow me to
suggest that the committers to this project be required to send a duly
signed copy of the contributor agreement to our Secretary. This is nothing
but standard ASF procedure and it could not do harm to follow our own
procedur
or committing?
~Andy
On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 10:15, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> Given the legal uncertainties related to our J2EE project, allow me to
> suggest that the committers to this project be required to send a duly
> signed copy of the contributor agreement to our Secretary. This is nothing
21 matches
Mail list logo
