Re: [RESULT] Request to release (revised) Tuscany M1

2006-06-01 Thread Jeremy Boynes
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

[RESULT] Request to release (revised) Tuscany M1

2006-05-31 Thread Jeremy Boynes
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 the

RE: [RESULT] Request to release (revised) Tuscany M1

2006-05-31 Thread Noel J. Bergman
Jeremy Boynes wrote: Passed with +1's from dims, jim, pzf, stoddard, jstrachan and no -1's. Please check with Cliff that your understanding regarding Rhino distribution as you explained it to Bill's objection is correct. Not to hold up the release, since you've documented the license and are