On May 31, 2012 5:31 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
(that said, I agree: this seems like it should be a proposal to
Commons, so we just need to handle that redirection)
And I didn't read the proposal closely enough, but took from Ralph's
comment that this was some Java code
Hey Jukka,
In your series of reviews, Bloodhound never showed up. Shall I presume that
means we're fine by your measures?
Thanks,
-g
On May 2, 2012 12:48 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
To a large extent the Incubator relies on the efforts of our mentors
to help
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Bruno Mahé bm...@apache.org wrote:
...
It seems that we're talking about this location:
http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/bigtop/bigtop-0.3.0-incubating/
Again, we don't distribute non-Apache software,
I didn't find any non-Apache software in the location
On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Bruno Mahé bm...@apache.org wrote:
First, thank you very much for taking the time to write a thoughtful reply.
On 05/08/2012 02:08 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
...
as well as we don't
distribute other Apache software either.
I found a bunch of Apache software
wrote:
On 5/4/2012 1:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they
have
reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries
and
comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
Point here is: provide
On May 7, 2012 11:57 AM, Owen Oapos;Malley omal...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 2:13 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
wrote:
Now (again IIUC) the interesting bit is whether it's better for BigTop
to be repackaging and -distributing upstream components by itself, or
if
In the Board agenda, we have a line where each Director can state they have
reviewed the report (before the meeting). They can also append queries and
comments. Little mini-discussions kinda happen in those comments.
Point here is: provide a similar location for IPMC members (including
shepherds)
On May 4, 2012 2:03 PM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote:
...
EOD existing Apache rules/license make no such distinction. Works
under the following licenses may be included within Apache products
(includes ASL).
Can people please stop using ASL or APL? No such thing. It is the
Apache
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
On May 3, 2012, at 6:18 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
...
The resulting TODOs are (see also the May2012 wiki page):
- jukka: Airavata, Droids, SIS, Wookie, Zeta Components
- rgardler: Amber, PhotArk
- mfranklin:
On May 2, 2012 8:10 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
...
I don't imagine the bucketing to be enshrined in written process, or
even be fixed. More of a convenience. We might do it by, for example,
asking Shepherds to identify the projects they would *prefer* to
shepherd and
On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On May 2, 2012 5:57 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Stated interests, and cross-community awareness are at odds with each
other.
The Board
On Apr 20, 2012 10:06 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Stephen Connolly
...
since my eventual intent is to bring this project into the ASF
(once I have sufficient community to bring it in that is! ;-) )
Community size and activity are
On Apr 8, 2012 4:56 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
...
I believe the proposal is now complete, pending additional feedback.
These touch up changes pretty much complete the proposal and we're ready
to
kick off a [VOTE] thread. Thoughts?
+1
Discussion has been mellow.
And we could simply ignore all this, as there was never any actual intent
to assume an analogous situation. It was a flip comment. That's all. Please
stop reading more into things, and escalating discussions.
Have fun. Move along.
-g
On Apr 4, 2012 11:47 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
It was a joke. Let it go...
On Apr 3, 2012 1:57 PM, Andreas Kuckartz a.kucka...@ping.de wrote:
On 03.04.2012 19:09, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Now let's see who complains and says we're fragmenting the
cloud community or whatever... Where's Simon? :)
Please, as far as I know the community
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 21:37, David Nalley da...@cloudstack.org wrote:
...
For
better or worse I don't perceive ASF having the desire to or currently
the ability to deal with filing for patents, or even if they would be
entitled to in this situation.
I'm not sure that we have a *specific*
On Mar 20, 2012 9:54 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
wrote:
Greets,
As noted below, the AOO LICENSE and NOTICE files are in what seems to
me to be
an unusual configuration. I'm not planning on voting -1
+1 (binding)
I am concerned about the choice of Robert for VP given his
(self-stated) very little time available at the keyboard. The VP
cannot simply spend 30 minutes on a report and be done for the
quarter. The Chair is the project liaison in both directions, and that
usually takes 5-10
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 20:52, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 3/1/2012 4:17 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Mar 1, 2012, at 9:20 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Perhaps you are signing up to do that ip-clearance, since it doesn't
seem to be coming from the committer.
IP
On Feb 29, 2012 4:15 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
On Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:13:30 AM Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
Hi Daniel...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org
On Feb 28, 2012 9:02 AM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
...
That sounds reasonable and hopefully easy to do (if not this case might
even be more worrisome then).
I'm not really sure though if Apache Extras is an appropriate location
either. I think Apache Extras intends to convey an affiliation
On Feb 29, 2012 7:32 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din nour.moham...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Greg...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the right thing for our community and product. That is
our
determination, and is our Right
On Feb 29, 2012 8:07 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the right thing for our community and product. That is
our
determination, and is our Right.
Sorry but I don't think
On Feb 29, 2012 8:31 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din nour.moham...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Greg...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I gave it more thought and IMO, I think we should raise the issue to
the
Board to get to some results,
Raise what issue? I
On Feb 29, 2012 8:45 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
...
OK do we have the right to create any kind of package or class under
com.cloudera (or any other companies packages)?
I'd like to approach it by answering this question. Because if we look at
it like this then we'll
On Feb 29, 2012 8:34 AM, Ian Dickinson i...@epimorphics.com wrote:
On 29/02/12 10:02, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
I don't see that this getting to any clear end yet. So I suggest that we
take this from a Sqoop instance to be a discussion on rules them selves.
I would like to start a [VOTE]
The vote closed a day or two ago, passing with all +1's. (fyi)
On Feb 29, 2012 2:48 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
Niall
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Arvind Prabhakar
even if they didn't sue us yet, I guess they could force us to drop
those packages at any time.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS
On Feb 6, 2012 11:41 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Perhaps the answer to Why is a licensing header necessary?
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-whyheader
is relevant here.
The README file is generally not going to be modified - or seen in
isolation - so it's not so
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 13:18, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Feb 6, 2012 5:26 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 6, 2012 11:41 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Perhaps the answer to Why
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 00:58, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
...
And to be honest, even if you (Bill) or the board folks think
that there should be an Incubation VP, are you willing to at least
try it my way, and then if all hell breaks loose, simply add the role
might want to break
this down into a couple of distinct topic threads for simplicities sake.
Anyways, just one commment;
On 2/2/2012 10:56 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
On Feb 1, 2012, at 6:38 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
I can easily see a small group of
people maintaining that overall status
On Feb 2, 2012 11:20 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Hi Benson,
I wouldn't have much problem with this, so long as I make it
clear that my intention isn't to remain in the position for longer than
one month, two months, whatever it takes to move towards
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 14:04, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 2/3/2012 12:51 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
So that everyone affected by these proposals has the opportunity to engage
in the discussion, I recommend that we pull these out of e-mail for a while
and ask
I believe there is a minor typo below:
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 17:00, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:19 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
wrote:
On 2/3/2012 11:11 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:26 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 08:56, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I have no problem with someone starting out as a mentor. *I* started
out as a mentor not too long ago. But as an IPMC member, I'd like to
know the experience profiles of mentors.
I think there are better ways to
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 11:30, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Hi,
I would like to point out that a reminder on the day the report is due is NOT
plenty of time.
While the *reminder* may not have given you much time, note that
podlings should already know their requirements and due
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 14:40, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
...
There is no announcement. The calendar is set well in advance:
repos/committers/board/calendar.txt
OK. With this and the script, I guess you would say that patches are
welcome ;-)
Nah. I hate that phrase. It is
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 21:22, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Hi Bill,
On Feb 1, 2012, at 3:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
...
VP Project Incubation
works with those Champions. Much like the foundation-wide security@a.o team
works with all the individual
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:58, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Hi Guys,
On Jan 31, 2012, at 1:17 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
Oh, so you want a supermajority in terms of those who have voted, not in
terms of the membership of the IPMC? Not unreasonable. Let's
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:18, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
Any other rational opinions?
I don't recall a case where a candidate was not elected because of an
unnecessarily strict -1. All I'm
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 13:20, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
Greg Stein wrote on Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:12:50 -0500:
In that light, we're talking about what kinds of voting results
should be forwarded by the Chair? If the Chair sends a request to the
Board to add somebody
+1
I've never liked vetoes for this. One person can hold an entire PMC hostage
simply for disliking someone (or worse: subtle corporate concerns masked
otherwise). People have said in the past, you should have veto so you're
not forced to work with somebody you dislike. I respond, grow up. we
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 23:53, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
On Jan 30, 2012, at 4:06 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
It is clear that with all the turmoil of late and people
lightly tossing around -1's that the notion of having veto
authority over personnel matters makes little sense on
On Jan 17, 2012 11:03 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
...
I'd like
to someday even see mentors show enough respect and humility
for their peers in the group to seek out their counsel in
situations they have never encountered before, so that we
all can provide some input
On Jan 10, 2012 9:30 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 5:11 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no fork in the current plan, so this discussion is moot
anyways.
There have been tons of long emails on this proposal and i haven't
read them all
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:20, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...Ignore the proposal. It is out of date, since the podling has
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 22:59, Niclas Hedhman nic...@hedhman.org wrote:
...
This sounds more and more like an example of Fascination of the
Apache brand, as a lever for commercial interest.
I agree with Roy that this is bad taste, and I wish WANdisco simply
makes a commercial derivative, OR
Since this thread has come back to life, I read through it and have
one comment to add:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 20:27, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I can see two problems with this view to begin with. One is IP
management. The more people participate in a project and the
On Jan 9, 2012 10:03 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
...
And, no, the discussion has not been with the Trac community -- it was
in private with a few individuals; as far as Apache is concerned,
it never happened.
And Oracle's private conversations, and their decisions regarding
On Jan 7, 2012 4:24 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
...
The original developers are not ambivalent to this fork.
Untrue. Christian and Remy are, and always have been, supportive. They were
the ones to suggest the fork, rather than trying to make the changes in
trunk.
What you have
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 14:33, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
Someone created
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/devicemap/site/trunk/?p=1227271
before the devicemap-commits@ list was created. I expect no list
received a commit mail about it.
This PMC may want to review
On Jan 4, 2012 4:01 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 4 January 2012 19:45, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 14:33, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
wrote:
Someone created
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/devicemap/site/trunk/?p=1227271
before
On Jan 4, 2012 7:50 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
Greg Stein wrote on Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 14:45:24 -0500:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 14:33, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
wrote:
Someone created
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/devicemap/site/trunk/?p
On Jan 3, 2012 2:30 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Jan 2, 2012, at 11:15 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Jan 2, 2012 10:51 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
Greg, I do not care one bit how much commit activity happens at Trac.
As
long as there is some
,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Niclas Hedhman nic...@hedhman.org
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2012 6:17 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Bloodhound to join the Incubator
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
I think
On Jan 3, 2012 11:48 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
...
A PMC I am on had this exact conversation with board members several
months ago regarding a code base the project is dependent on that is
housed
outside the ASF which we were considering bringing in as a subproject.
On Jan 3, 2012 1:28 PM, Kalle Korhonen kalle.o.korho...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
So the generic policy is there is no generic policy, and instead there
is appropriate application of judgement to specific cases.
Generic policy
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 15:13, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On 01/03/2012 07:35 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
[1] I don't see it as our place to *judge* communities. If it is a fork,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 06:34, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Hyrum K Wright
hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com wrote:
The Incubator proposal was publicized and discussed on trac-dev
*simultaneously* with the discussion on general@incubator, and the
On Jan 2, 2012 10:51 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
Greg, I do not care one bit how much commit activity happens at Trac. As
long as there is some kind of active community it is improper to fork it
without their permission.
Eh? You ever read the rules for revolutionaries
+1 (binding)
On Dec 27, 2011 4:51 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org
wrote:
Hi Incubator PMC members (*),
I've just reviewed the [PROPOSAL] Flex for Apache Incubator thread
and I think all relevant issues have been adressed now.
I have added Anne and Dave Fisher as mentors,
On Dec 22, 2011 5:05 AM, Raju Bitter rajubit...@googlemail.com wrote:
...
I know this message is very long, but I think these topics need some
clarification.
Honestly? My read of your message(s) is, let's ask for so much stuff at
the start, that this podling/community can never even get
On Dec 22, 2011 8:28 AM, Raju Bitter rajubit...@googlemail.com wrote:
But as Bertrand has said, I've raised the questions to early in the
process.
Yeah... possibly I'm just reading it as obstruction, when the honest intent
is awareness for the future podling. My apologies.
Cheers,
-g
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 15:30, Raju Bitter rajubit...@googlemail.com wrote:
...
2) Action Script Virtual Machine (AVM)
In November 2006 Adobe open source the Flash Player Script engine:
http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/press/mozilla-2006-11-07.html
Is the source code of Tamarin still the current
I'd prefer to see Apache Flex voted on by itself, without tying the
contribution to Falcon. I suspect there are more than enough people who are
willing to have a go atbthisbwithout Falcon.
Let's not strive for a perfect contribution from Adobe, and miss an
opportunity for an excellent
Hoo hoo!! Look at that committer list!
Great stuff. Happy to see this finally land. Big +1!
On Dec 19, 2011 3:21 PM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I would like to propose Flex to be an Apache Incubator project.
Here's a link to the proposal:
Agreed. That is/was my read, too.
On Dec 19, 2011 6:48 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
I don't read it that way. Yes, ASF projects only contain individuals, but
most of those individuals are employed and are in some way influenced by
their employer. Calling
On Dec 19, 2011 1:55 PM, Hyrum K Wright hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com wrote:
It seems discussion on Bloodhound has died down, so it's time to call
a VOTE. Please vote on the acceptance of Bloodhound into the Apache
Incubator.
The proposal is available at [1] and its content is also included
==
* Hyrum Wright
* Greg Stein
== Sponsoring Entity ==
The Apache Incubator
On Dec 12, 2011 3:12 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Hyrum K Wright
hyrum.wri...@wandisco.com wrote:
By it's own recognition, however, the development community
surrounding Trac has largely dissipated, with little mailing list
@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Cc: Mark Struberg; Ian Wild; Greg Stein; hwri...@apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Bloodhound
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
Uh, here's the TRAC License: http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki
Heads up on some incoming proposals.
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Adobe-revises-Flex-s-future-at-the-Apache-Software-Foundation-1380242.html
NOTE: and yes, Adobe is doing this right: they say they are crafting
*proposals*. All is good here; I'm just giving some heads-up since I
hadn't
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 04:26, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
David Crossley wrote on Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 19:00:58 +1100:
This reporting stuff is getting harder to manually manage.
We now have sixty (yes 60) podlings currently in incubation.
Can anyone see a way to improve this
Board sponsorship equates to mandate: the Incubator PMC has no choice in the
matter.
We used that for getting an Apache-licensed J2EE server (Geronimo), but we
did *not* for OOo. We left that decision to the IPMC. I believe the concept
is obsolete and can be removed from the docs. I do not forsee
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 22:34, Doug Meil doug.m...@explorysmedical.com wrote:
Hi there-
I thought the email chain prompted by my questions had a gracious and
productive ending several days ago, but if you would like to start this up
again, ok.
No... Knowing Noel, he was not opening
On Sep 4, 2011 3:41 AM, Bernd Fondermann bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com
wrote:
...
So, you are saying more than 10% of the non-generated code base (and you
are
not counting lib-style uses/JARs here, right?) is derived from other
Apache
code? That seems to be unusual. Just curious, could you
I concur with Craig's thoughts.
+1 to retire (binding).
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 19:27, Craig L Russell craig.russ...@oracle.com wrote:
+1 for retiring Bluesky
I believe that the Bluesky project is well-intentioned but just doesn't
belong at Apache.
The coders do not use mail lists for
On Jun 13, 2011 11:31 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
Lists are now available:
ooo-{dev,commits,issues,notifications,private}@incubator.apache.org
Thanks, Joe! Subscribed.
The private list should only be subscribed to by folks who have already
submitted an ICLA and account
On Jun 10, 2011 9:03 AM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
...
[ ] +1 Accept OpenOffice.org for incubation
[ ] +0 Indifferent to OpenOffice.org incubation
[ ] -1 Reject OpenOffice.org for incubation
+1 (binding)
On Jun 9, 2011 9:29 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
sa3r...@gmail.com wrote on 06/09/2011 12:00:22 PM:
If any of this is unclear or if I got anything wrong, please speak up.
Presumably the wiki locks, if not physically, then at least by convention,
when the call for a vote has been
On Jun 9, 2011 11:16 AM, Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com wrote:
...
It still leaves something you can't answer though: whether it is
Rob's
understanding of IBM's intention to camouflage such changes or to flag
them all openly and clearly. Ultimately with a suite of 8+ million
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:27, Ross Gardler rgard...@apache.org wrote:
Khirano,
I just noticed your mail never received a response. Sorry for that, reply
online...
Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos)
On 6 Jun 2011, at 18:02, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
It
Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other owners
to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there holds
the copyright. We just have to determine who, and then ask. Some definite
legwork, but it seems doable.
On Jun 7, 2011 10:15 AM, Simon Phipps
On Jun 7, 2011 3:01 PM, Simon Brouwer simon.o...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Op 7-6-2011 22:37, William A. Rowe Jr. schreef:
On 6/7/2011 3:17 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
The OpenOffice.org installation packages contain code from a
considerable number of
external libraries (i.e. third party ones that are
and need a do-over.
It is not about leaving the incubator or anything. I think of it as baked
prudence with a sauce of transparency. I'm surprised this is a problem, but
then I are a simple man ... .
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
Sent
Whatever. This is just not a concern. Please end this thread. There is
no problem, so this is just noise.
-g
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 00:44, Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
The problem here is that
Hey. Feel free to spin your theories.
It just isn't possible to divide markets around ALv2 code.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 03:10, Andreas Kuckartz a.kucka...@ping.de wrote:
Am 06.06.2011 08:22, schrieb Greg Stein:
This is just not a concern. Please end this thread. There is
no problem, so
Bah. It is solving a nonexistent problem. Sit back, and enjoy life instead.
On Jun 6, 2011 6:59 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6 June 2011 11:34, Dirk-Willem van Gulik di...@webweaving.org wrote:
IMHO - if there is any such risk - we 1) should both help the regulators
understand
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:46, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
...
And the natural extension is that if there is no home for the OOo code with
Apache where will it end up? That scenario is not without risk either.
As I've said elsewhere, I would lobby our Board for an unsupported
tarball of
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:17, Florian Effenberger
flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
Hi Jim,
Jim Jagielski wrote on 2011-06-06 18.06:
The reality is that IBM employees wearing their IBM hats, have made it
crystal clear on the general@incubator list that IBM is going to force
The
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:46, Florian Effenberger
flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote:
Greg Stein wrote on 2011-06-06 18.36:
...
The software grant is a done deal. I happen to believe the proposal
will be accepted, but it is not a done deal.
Ah, okay - so the software grant exists independent
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 13:37, Simos Xenitellis
simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
On 6/6/11 10:41,
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 14:08, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 6 Jun 2011, at 19:03, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
...
However, it seems to me that October and November are still rather far
off, and with the wealth of conferences over the next two months,
perhaps we could set something up
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 14:18, Alexandro Colorado j...@openoffice.org wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 14:08, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 6 Jun 2011, at 19:03, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
...
However, it seems to me
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 14:17, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 13:50, Greg Stein wrote:
...
How about we drop these lines of discussion, and simply follow Ross'
advice and focus on what is needed by the Incubator PMC to accept
this proposal?
While I agree that a lot
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 14:31, eric b eric.bach...@free.fr wrote:
Hi,
Le 6 juin 11 à 20:21, Greg Stein a écrit :
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 14:18, Alexandro Colorado j...@openoffice.org
wrote:
I'll surrely can make it to the US if needed. OSCON is good, but would
like
to know
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 15:04, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
It's just a meeting between colleagues. If all it does is
break a little of the entrenched ice I'd call it a success.
Sure beats email for dealing with emotions/trust.
Right.
And we can also be optimistic that the
On Jun 4, 2011 6:25 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:
...
2. With regard to building distributions, binary libraries are terribly
awkward unless Apache were to limit its OpenOffice project to a single
platform and programming model. In contrast, LibreOffice is going full-up
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 15:20, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
...
Just to drag the point here from the other thread where it was made, the
problem is less the size of the code (although it is enormous and will make
a great stress test for the SVN team :-) ) and more the need for frequent
501 - 600 of 842 matches
Mail list logo
