On Feb 3, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Meeraj Kunnumpurath wrote:
Paul,
The fork on Tuscany was not instigated by BEA. Of the three committers
who decided to leave Tuscany, due to technical differences and
otherwise, only Jim Marino was employed by BEA. Myself and Jeremy
Boynes were independent
On Jan 9, 2008, at 8:24 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
As you all know Yoko is being assimilated into CXF and Geronimo.
Both PMCs understand that they are responsible for the provenance
of the contributions that are being brought in. My question is
about what remains to be done on the
There is an updated license here:
http://www.osoa.org/xmlns/sca/1.0/license.txt
and I've attached a copy of the text below. To my layman's
understanding that seems OK but it would be good to have official
blessing.
Thanks Janet for getting this through.
--
Jeremy
On Jan 7, 2008, at 3:56
On Dec 13, 2007, at 5:46 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Wednesday 12 December 2007 19:45, Niall Pemberton wrote:
I couldn't see a STATUS file in svn
You have mention this for the Yoko project as well, and I start to
wonder who
of us two has misunderstood what the so called status file is.
On Oct 30, 2007, at 10:03 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
--8--
---
[ ] +1 Allow RAT to enter incubator, sponsored by IPMC
[ ] +0
[ ] -0
[ ] -1 Do no allow RAT to enter incubator
On Oct 13, 2007, at 10:07 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Ant,
Are there any issues that should be pointed out, such as the
(hopefully)
mechanical licensing header issue in stdcxx, or community
diversity, which
at least in part is measuring independence from corporate backing
(a popular
On Oct 15, 2007, at 8:02 PM, Paul Fremantle wrote:
Jeremy
Neither of the two independents
are active in the core project areas of Java SCA or SDO (they are
committing to the C++ implementation or to DAS).
Is it stated somewhere that the Java SCA/SDO components are core
compared
to C++
On Sep 30, 2007, at 11:30 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Sunday 30 September 2007 01:53, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
The recent Tuscany distribution contains XSDs licensed under the OSOA
license[1] which contains the following:
Permission to copy, make derivative works of, and distribute the
Service
The recent Tuscany distribution contains XSDs licensed under the OSOA
license[1] which contains the following:
Permission to copy, make derivative works of, and distribute the
Service Component Architecture
JavaDoc, Interface Definition Files and XSD files in any medium
without fee or
On Mar 23, 2007, at 7:34 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Dims has asked to see some progress on the Tuscany community front. I
have taken these artifacts down for now.
Jeremy, on this and the Tuscany SCA Java kernel, what is your take
on the
effect of the release vis-a-vis
Dims has asked to see some progress on the Tuscany community front. I
have taken these artifacts down for now.
--
Jeremy
On Mar 12, 2007, at 11:59 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
The Tuscany community recently voted to release version 1.0-
incubating of our implementation of the API classes
Dims has asked to see some progress on the Tuscany community front. I
have taken these artifacts down for now.
--
Jeremy
On Mar 13, 2007, at 12:11 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
The Tuscany community recently voted to release version 2.0-alpha-
incubating of the Kernel for SCA Java.
[VOTE
Another vote that may have been lost in the flood. So far a +1 from
robert.
Thanks
--
Jeremy
On Mar 14, 2007, at 3:33 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 3/14/07, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 13, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Mar 13, 2007, at 3:46 PM, robert
This may have been lost in the flood of other release mails - so far
was have +1's from Robert and Dims but still need a third.
Thanks
Jeremy
On Mar 18, 2007, at 11:12 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
+1
On 3/18/07, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 3/16/07, Jeremy Boynes
On Mar 18, 2007, at 4:08 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
Irregardless of that, the IPMC could stipulate that releases are
final
stepping stones towards graduation, and require an active and diverse
community to allow for releases. After all, it is the Incubator
that does the
release (legally)
Tuscany has issues though. When you look at active committers (at
least one commit in the last 3 months) it is a different picture: 14
from IBM and 3 from elsewhere (83%). Worse, there are modules where
no non-IBM committer has ever been active (e.g. Java/SDO, Java/DAS, C+
+/*).
--
Jeremy
On Mar 16, 2007, at 8:42 AM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
Is everyone in ASF willing to be comfortable with the ASF stamp of
approval on a project that might still be in the process of vetting
code provenance, or still checking licenses, but chooses to do an
incubating release anyway?
As Dims, said
On Mar 15, 2007, at 4:03 PM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
On 3/15/07, robert burrell donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
the latest advice on best practice from cliff is that a separate
DISCLAIMER.txt is preferred to including the incubator disclaimer in
the NOTICE.txt. the reason is that the NOTICE.txt
On Mar 15, 2007, at 3:49 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 3/13/07, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Tuscany community recently voted to release version 1.0-
incubating of our implementation of the API classes for the OSOA
specification V1.0:
http://mail-archives.apache.org
On Mar 15, 2007, at 5:43 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
On Thursday 15 March 2007 20:07, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
There appears to be a bug in the gpg plugin for mvn. When I did this
release I used gpg:sign as a goal on the command line and that
consistently generates invalid keys for all except the last
ONE: Should Incubator tarballs go in the normal place (and thus
mirrors).
[X] +1
[ ] -1
TWO: Should there be an Incubator maven repository.
[ ] +1
[X] -1
On Mar 15, 2007, at 6:49 PM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
If we accept this argument, then we naturally need a place where the
incubating
On Mar 15, 2007, at 5:07 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Mar 15, 2007, at 3:49 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 3/13/07, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Tuscany community recently voted to release version 1.0-
incubating of our implementation of the API classes for the OSOA
On Mar 15, 2007, at 7:59 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Frank Question, Would your vote be the same if you thought Tuscany
would graduate very soon?
Yes, my vote has nothing to do with Tuscany. I'm actually pretty
ambivalent about the result and was voting more for consistency
across TLPs
On Mar 14, 2007, at 10:57 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Thanks! There is also the less severe problem with ezmlm stripping
attachments from some posts (see INFRA-1194). So far I haven't been
able to identify what causes them to be removed. Does anyone have
any ideas?
Just from observation e.g.
Thanks - it does.
FWIW my mailer sends .diff as application/octet-stream and .txt as
text/plain
On Mar 14, 2007, at 11:13 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 3/14/07, Martin Sebor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks! There is also the less severe problem with ezmlm stripping
attachments from some
On Mar 14, 2007, at 3:33 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 3/14/07, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 13, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Mar 13, 2007, at 3:46 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the source and binary kernel releases look identical
zip errors in jars
The Tuscany community recently voted to release version 1.0-
incubating of our implementation of the API classes for the OSOA
specification V1.0:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200703.mbox/%
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The source archives and RAT reports can be found at:
The Tuscany community recently voted to release version 2.0-alpha-
incubating of the Kernel for SCA Java.
[VOTE] to release the kernel modules
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200703.mbox/%
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[VOTE] to release an amended version of the sample code
On Mar 13, 2007, at 3:46 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the source and binary kernel releases look identical
zip errors in jars unpackaged from kernel-2.0-alpha-incubating.zip:
* core/src/test/resources/deployables/sample-calculator.jar
*
On Mar 13, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Mar 13, 2007, at 3:46 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the source and binary kernel releases look identical
zip errors in jars unpackaged from kernel-2.0-alpha-incubating.zip:
* core/src/test/resources/deployables/sample-calculator.jar
Passed with +1s from dims, jim, and pzf and no -1s
Thank you.
--
Jeremy
On Feb 26, 2007, at 2:36 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Resending as a [VOTE] thread as this one seems to be rambling ...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Feb 25, 2007 6:34 AM
wrote:
+1 from me.
-- dims
On 2/26/07, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Resending as a [VOTE] thread as this one seems to be rambling ...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Feb 25, 2007 6:34 AM
Subject: Ratify Tuscany vote to release build
Thanks Dims.
We still need two more votes for approval - would a couple of other
IPMC members be able to take a quick look?
Thanks
--
Jeremy
On Feb 27, 2007, at 7:15 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
+1 from me.
-- dims
On 2/26/07, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Resending as a [VOTE
Resending as a [VOTE] thread as this one seems to be rambling ...
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Feb 25, 2007 6:34 AM
Subject: Ratify Tuscany vote to release build dependencies
To: general@incubator.apache.org
The vote below was held
the IPMC to approve the release.
--
Jeremy
Begin forwarded message:
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: February 25, 2007 6:14:15 AM PST
To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Subject: [RESULT] Release updated parent pom and buildtools
Reply-To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org
Passed with +1's from
On Feb 25, 2007, at 7:18 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Sunday 25 February 2007 22:34, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
The vote below was held in the Tuscany podling to release two
artifacts that are used by other modules during the build process;
they are a podling-wide parent pom and configuration data
On Feb 20, 2007, at 5:47 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
I went through the process and attached is a patch for the site to
include Tuscany in the matrix.
AIUI though these should be applied/sent by a Officer
which I would assume in our case would the IPMC Chair.
Since
On Feb 22, 2007, at 2:08 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
NOTE: Both (1) and (2) can be taken care of by having the
org.apache:apache:3
artifact as the parent.Should that be a requirement?
(Actually, should
there be an incubator parent that lives in the middle?)
I made a start on such a
If we end up switching to the main repos, then I think the pom would
be fairly empty as the values in apache:3 would be reusable. I still
think it is worth having as it ties the podling back to the offical
project that is doing the releases.
If we keep as we are, the repository,
On Feb 19, 2007, at 1:14 PM, Yoav Shapira wrote:
== Tuscany ==
iPMC Reviewers: dims, jerenkrantz, yoavs, jukka, twl, noel
Tuscany provides infrastructure for developing service-oriented
applications
based on the OSOA specifications for Service Component Architecture
(SCA)
and Service Data
On Feb 19, 2007, at 11:28 PM, James M Snell wrote:
All of the instructions can be found at [1]. Just step through that
and
it shouldn't take too long.
As far as I understand, each project is responsible for it's own
notifications.
- James
[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/crypto.html
Thanks.
What we actually have in svn is a mvn pom which references jxta and
bouncycastle:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/tuscany/java/sca/runtime/
services/discovery/jxta/pom.xml
The bouncycastle reference is there because jxta needs it; there is
no direct reference from our code.
My
On Feb 17, 2007, at 5:27 PM, James M Snell wrote:
I've gone ahead and filed the export notification and updated the ASF
exports page [1]. I also added an appropriate notification to the
distributions README.
[1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/
In Tuscany our next release will have a
The important part here is not to validate the process but the
provenance of the code being contributed. It does not matter whether
the code was developed in an open or closed manner, by one individual
or by many, what we have a responsibility to establish is that the
code can legally be
On Oct 28, 2006, at 12:46 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 10/28/06, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 28, 2006, at 6:59 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the status file is worrying: there are two CCLAs pending. please
confirm that this is either an oversight
On Oct 28, 2006, at 6:59 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the status file is worrying: there are two CCLAs pending. please
confirm that this is either an oversight or that these CCLAs are not
pertinent to this material.
The CCLAs are pertinent and were sent to Jim on 2005-12-28 as
recorded
Passed with binding +1's from rdonkin, geirm, dims
and non-binding +1 from matezw
Thank you everyone.
--
Jeremy
On Oct 15, 2006, at 6:34 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
The Tuscany PPMC has voted to release a parent pom and buildtools
jar that are dependencies for a forthcoming M2 release
The Tuscany PPMC has voted to release a parent pom and buildtools jar
that are dependencies for a forthcoming M2 release. These would be
made available through the m2-incubating-repository to allow end
users to build source distributions of that release. In accordance
with Incubator
On Oct 13, 2006, at 6:28 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 10/12/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Other than wait for Robert's scanning tool? :-)
no need to wait: get the source (http://code.google.com/p/arat/) and
run the RAT against the source distribution (i'll improved
On Oct 12, 2006, at 8:13 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
The Mentors can and should engage the community on best practices.
When the
Incubator PMC is presented with a release to approve, we ought to
focus on
actual requirements, such as:
Licensing
Notification
Signing
On Oct 12, 2006, at 3:09 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
The Mentors can and should engage the community on best practices.
When the Incubator PMC is presented with a release to approve, we
ought to focus on actual requirements
I would like to use this as part of the run-up for Tuscany's next
release. Did you check this in somewhere and if so where? If not, can
I have a copy I can run locally?
Thanks
--
Jeremy
On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:31 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
i have a basic tool that i've been running
On Sep 14, 2006, at 2:40 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
I would suggest it go into:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/tools/
as it would be applicable for non-incubator projects as well.
Unless there's something special, how about a public tree? A podling
it's own right?
--
Jeremy
On Sep 9, 2006, at 5:48 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 8 Sep 06, at 10:36 PM 8 Sep 06, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 9/8/06, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This artifact would need to released by the Incubator PMC so that it
can be made freely available via ibiblio. The latest version is in
SVN
On Sep 9, 2006, at 10:12 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Hi Jeremy,
On Sep 9, 2006, at 8:53 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Sep 8, 2006, at 7:23 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Hi Jeremy,
Thanks for doing this. I think it's great for podlings to get a
leg up.
I'd like to understand where this POM
As discussed recently I have created a Maven2 POM that is meant to
capture current Incubator policy for podlings. For example, this
defines the location of the Maven repositories where they should
release artifacts to. This allows a podling to inherit from this POM
and avoid the need to
On Sep 6, 2006, at 7:59 AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 9/6/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Our initial idea was to have short (15-min?) talks about as many
podlings as we
can fit in to the timeslot. Tell us what the project is about,
who is
On Sep 3, 2006, at 10:41 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 1 Sep 06, at 1:03 PM 1 Sep 06, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
Any other thoughts on this? Any objection to checking it in to
incubator SVN?
I think it's a good idea because a lot of the common information
can be collected, made consistent and that's
Any other thoughts on this? Any objection to checking it in to
incubator SVN?
Thanks
--
Jeremy
On Aug 30, 2006, at 3:45 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
The Maven project maintains a POM that can be used as a parent by
other ASF projects
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/pom/trunk/asf/pom.xml
On Jul 29, 2006, at 10:03 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
On Jul 30, 2006, at 12:41 AM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
There are (at least) two scenarios where I believe there is
legitimate cause
for concern with the way Maven does things:
* You can declare a dependency on a particular
On Jul 30, 2006, at 3:15 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html is really
just an outline. lot of work required.
I had an itch to help with this one.
--
Jeremy
-
To
On Jul 14, 2006, at 2:30 PM, Martin van den Bemt wrote:
Would probably also be a good idea to fix the tuscany page
itself..It mentions that it is in the incubator, but the page title
and header is Apache Tuscany..
The branding page says that a podling must be referred to as Apache
After the recent discussion on the New Committers thread, I'd like
to ask someone to create a private/ppmc list for Tuscany. I opened a
Jira for this a while ago
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-839 and someone who shall
remain nameless volunteered to do it but hasn't quite got around
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
In any case, the framework part seems just like what JBI impls like
ServiceMix are doing and what JBI alternates like SCA (Tuscany) are
doing. Since James is a mentor of this maybe he can explain the
relationship (or lack thereof) between Celtixfire and ServiceMix.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
I think the initial decision was that a PPMC was not necessary as the code was
just going to be imported into the MyFaces project. Therefore, the MyFaces
PMC
is responsible for executing the duties that a PPMC would normally do.
Perhaps we need to clarify these
robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 6/7/06, Paul Fremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will try to get a template based on Maven 1.x ready for ApacheCon
It probably makes far more sense to make that Maven 2.x.
both would be best
a lot of projects are still maven 1. what would be great is
On 6/1/06, Cliff Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes -- it's true that the policy is still only proposed and that the
proposed policy allows for a transition/evaluation period to see the
impact of some of the requirements.
I would not suggest that you remove something from the release just
On 5/25/06, Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We voted on tuscany-dev on a revised version that addresses the issues
Robert raised below and the results can be viewed at
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.webservices.tuscany.devel/3403
We would like to request approval from
On 5/27/06, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is STATUS appropriate to be bundled in the release?
I had the same question relating to the Tuscany release. In general I
don't think it should as STATUS reflects the state of the project
rather than the code being distributed and technical
We voted on tuscany-dev on a revised version that addresses the issues
Robert raised below and the results can be viewed at
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.webservices.tuscany.devel/3403
We would like to request approval from the Incubator PMC to release
this new version.
The
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-8?page=all ]
Jeremy Boynes updated INCUBATOR-8:
--
Attachment: tuscany-java-contrib.jar
Contribution of Java implementation by BEA and IBM as covered by CCLA
Incubate Tuscany SOA project
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Folks,
The WS-PMC has voted to accept the re-written Tuscany proposal with 11
+1 votes (and zero -1/+0/-0 votes)
Thanks,
dims
Dims
Great, thank you!
I have updated the proposal on the wiki to reflect this result and to
change sponsor from the Incubator to the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to offer development help on the proposed Tuscany SOA project.
Great - welcome aboard.
From the Tuscany proposal, I would be interested in helping with the
following technology areas:
* integration with Axis2 policy implementations for security,
Roy T.Fielding wrote:
No, the proposal is all about SOA. What you are saying is that the
*actual plan* is about SCA. What I am saying is that the proposal
needs to match the actual plan, preferably a plan that is actionable,
rather than a statement of how happy the SOA community may
Paul Fremantle wrote:
Now - can someone give me an idea of how open the model is? In other words
are the specifications behind Tuscany open to being modified? Will they be
submitted to a standards body and in what timeframe? It would be good to
know that Apache and in particular the
/incubator/tuscany
3.3 Jira
* Tuscany (TUSCANY)
4. Identify the initial set of committers:
* Jeremy Boynes
* Frank Budinsky
* Jean-Sebastien Delfino
* Mike Edwards
* Padmapriya Illindala
* Jim Marino
* Geir Magnusson Jr.
* Eddie O'Neil
* Radu Preotiuc-Pietro
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-8?page=all ]
Jeremy Boynes updated INCUBATOR-8:
--
Attachment: Tuscany-apache-proposal.tar.gz
Example of seed code for Java implementation - actual contribution to be
uploaded on acceptance of proposal
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
speaking for myself, we'd be glad to make tuscany part of the WS
family. If you wish, we can have a vote on the PMC list. just let us
know.
thx,
dims
On 11/30/05, Kenneth Tam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Noel,
(I worked with Jeremy on the proposal, and this
Changshin Lee wrote:
Quick question - Is the project going to be a JBI (JSR 208)
implementation?
The design of the code we are contributing is intended to support
multiple container models. At this time there is an implementation of a
very simple Java container but some experiments have been
robert burrell donkin wrote:
i've done some digging around and think that the software grant applies to a
specific, concrete instance of the source. this will typically be examplared
by a tarballed source artifact checked into subversion. am i right and is
the incubator the right place to
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Brian McCallister wrote:
On Jul 26, 2005, at 11:21 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
So what happens now? :-)
Logistical details that come to mind are:
* adding Derby committers to the DB PMC - I assume a vote on who to add
takes place on the DB PMC list
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
Has the Derby project engaged suitable DB PMC members as committers and PPMC
members, to enhance oversight and increase cross-pollination ?? (Sorry if
this has been mentioned before, but I have not followed the details of
Derby.)
DB PMC members have been with Derby
Brian Behlendorf wrote:
It's not so much dissonance as an exception. In an incubating
project, the developers are usually new to the ASF, and skipped the
meritocracy step by virtue of association with the project before it
entered Apache (here's the list of committers). Therefore it's
Brian McCallister wrote:
Derby depends on nothing else at Apache (except ant for its build), and
is depended on by nothing else at Apache.
Let's not forget that the Derby codebase extends back to the dim dark
distant days of the 1990's before many of the ASF's Java projects even
existed.
The changes to the Derby page have made it.
Thanks everyone.
--
Jeremy
Garrett Rooney wrote:
Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
How long ago did you do that? svn up used to work a week or so ago.
This was on March 26th. svn up should still work, it'll just take up to
4 hours before that data is synced
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
Er, just a vote -- there is no veto for this type of decision.
Actually, althought it has never been necessary to address so far, I do
recall discussion of a -1 veto option graduation. Yes, it is a policy
decision, but it effects importing code
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Actually, I agree with you, and others have expressed the same concern,
although without casting a vote. Adding new Committers is probably the #1
issue facing the Derby project, which has otherwise performed excellently to
date. As even Jeremy pointed out, were IBM to
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I vote -0. Ideally, a more diverse group of contributors
would alleviate concerns, or at least some plan of
action, post-graduation, which would address those
concerns.
There is a plan in place to do this which would continue after graduation.
There are currently several
-0800
From: Jeremy Boynes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
To: general@incubator.apache.org
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roy T.Fielding wrote:
The incubator site uses Forrest, not Maven; most people just edit
David Crossley wrote:
Garrett Rooney wrote:
I believe a 'svn up' needs to be run by someone on minutaur (perhaps in
/www/incubator.apache.org?), then you need to wait for the sync job to
copy the results over to the current web server (ajax?).
Thanks for clarifying. I just did that 'svn up' so
As that one committer I am also comfortable discussing this.
The user community is growing continuously and is very diverse. The
developer community, while not as diverse as we would like, has
demonstrated that it is following its charter (found at
http://incubator.apache.org/derby/ ), is
Joey Smith wrote:
Sorry if you've already answered this, but how, exactly, do we
subscribe to these lists?
send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and acknowledge the reply
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional
Clinton Begin wrote:
Hi all,
I love Derby, but for unit testing it's just too slow. We used to use
HSQLDB before iBATIS joined ASF, but I switched to Derby it because I
wasn't sure if HSQLDB was compatible with the ASF license.
Thoughts?
Axion?
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/axion.html
--
Clinton Begin wrote:
Hmmm... I'm a bit worried about the status of Axion. It's last update
was well over a year ago and has no status updates at all.
So is this an implicit no, HSQLDB is not compatible?
Not meant that way - just offering an alternative.
IIRC hsqldb is BSD licensed which I believe
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Wednesday 08 December 2004 21:29, Brian McCallister wrote:
As there are no JDO lists (yet, just asked for them), I'll bring one
concern I have up here, which is the name.
Apache Jay Dee Objects is really cool: Let me think of Jack Daniels :o)
Apache Jade ?
--
Jeremy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8 Nov 2004, at 18:53, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
I think we may be in violent agreement here :-)
I think we should add some type of collective entity, I just hesitate
to call it a Group as that tends to be associated with a specific
model ( a relatively static set of users
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8 Nov 2004, at 15:58, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Its very common with people workflow to assign a task to a group of
users (or a role) rather than assigning it to a specific individual
user. Then a user sees a list of all available tasks they could
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
David Sean Taylor wrote:
Attached is the filled form that you sent me on June 26.
Thank you. :-) Sorry for the delay.
I have checked in the form and your instance of it, as you can see from CVS.
When we rebuild the site, they will appear on the website as well. I take
it
Status report from the Geronimo PPMC
* The project status file (/home/cvs/incubator-geronimo/STATUS)
is up to date.
* Geir Magnusson is preparing a response to the JBoss letter for
approval by the ASF Board. It concludes that there is no validity
to the
Apologies for the last minute update.
Status report for the Incubator Geronimo Project
* is the STATUS file up to date? (also post link)
Yes
/home/cvs/incubator/site/projects/geronimo.cwiki
* any legal, cross-project or personal issues
that still need to be addressed?
A serious legal issue
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
