On 7/21/06, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 21:28 -0400, Dan Diephouse wrote:
snip
While I value your feedback and input, if you don't have enough time, I
don't understand why you should be a mentor. We have 4 mentors already,
and
On 7/20/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 21:28 -0400, Dan Diephouse wrote:
+1 Noel. I'd like to join the PPMC too as an interested party observer.
I will poke my nose in as a mentor when possible but don't have the
cycles to commit to it.
Hi
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 21:28 -0400, Dan Diephouse wrote:
+1 Noel. I'd like to join the PPMC too as an interested party observer.
I will poke my nose in as a mentor when possible but don't have the
cycles to commit to it.
Hi Sanjiva,
I'm confused, you're
There's a slight difference Dan. As you are a WS committer, you have a
right and responsibility to poke your nose and you do have the karma
to work on / fix anything you feel like in various ws projects. I hope
you appreciate the difference :)
-- dims
On 7/21/06, Dan Diephouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Jul 21, 2006, at 11:25 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Yep, both ws and jakarta have single ACL's. So any committer on any
sub-project can *CHOOSE* to participate in any other sub-project.
So can anyone who isn't a committer. You don't need commit access
to participate.
Roy
Yep Roy. What i meant is a committer on one jakarta project
automatically has karma to other jakarta project if they wish to make
changes. They can choose to work on the other project if they want to
without needing an explicit VOTE. People who are not committers don't
have that pleasure.
--
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
It's also clear at least to me that they don't want any input or
rather interference in matters technical either (at least learn
from our mistakes!), at least till the current merger is done by
which time its too late to align some of the efforts with ongoing
work in
On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 21:28 -0400, Dan Diephouse wrote:
+1 Noel. I'd like to join the PPMC too as an interested party observer.
I will poke my nose in as a mentor when possible but don't have the
cycles to commit to it.
Hi Sanjiva,
I'm confused, you're saying you don't have the time to
On 18 Jul 06, at 9:38 PM 18 Jul 06, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jason,
I am +1 for the project, overall.
I do suggest that we start out with the PPMC of you and the other
Mentors,
have you bring Dan and other appropriate people onto the PMC as
your first
order of business, and them go about
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Some would be highly offended, and a few would bother to look for the
signal embedded in the noise. But when one tries to become an active
participant in a community, the dynamic changes, and so must one's
interactions with others. My point to Mladen, and I believe the
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 21:38 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jason,
I am +1 for the project, overall.
I do suggest that we start out with the PPMC of you and the other Mentors,
have you bring Dan and other appropriate people onto the PMC as your first
order of business, and them go about
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 23:02 +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
now hani's becoming a somewhat important and certainly famous figure in the
java ecosystem i hope that he'd start to realize that some people are hurt
by his offensive posts and lay off the personal stuff with those folks who
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 21:38 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jason,
I am +1 for the project, overall.
I do suggest that we start out with the PPMC of you and the other Mentors,
have you bring Dan and other appropriate people onto the PMC as your first
order of
Dan Diephouse wrote:
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
I'd like to join the PPMC too as an interested party observer.
I will poke my nose in as a mentor when possible but don't
have the cycles to commit to it.
While I value your feedback and input, if you don't have enough time, I
don't
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
So far we have 8 binding votes and I was wondering what the official
time period was for the voting window? Is it 72 hours as it is for
everything else? Just want to move on to the next phase of the process
if that is permissible at this point. Here are the votes
On 18 Jul 06, at 9:46 AM 18 Jul 06, Mladen Turk wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
So far we have 8 binding votes and I was wondering what the
official time period was for the voting window? Is it 72 hours as
it is for everything else? Just want to move on to the next phase
of the process
I started writing a long draft probably 10 times, but stopped short of
pressing the send button. At this point, i know exactly who will
say what, no matter which position i take (based on feedback i got
during ApacheCon EU).
I am happy that Peter and Jim are there as mentors. I trust them and
Jason van Zyl wrote:
So you wouldn't mind of mine humble non binding -1
vote. Like said, I don't have nothing against
that project, but like in many things in life
even the ASF seems to behave in the spirit of:
Quod licet Jovi non licet bovi.
That's very sad :(
I don't think it's that hard
On Jul 18, 2006, at 11:04 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Well, I just expressed my opinion as an ASF member, because this
project and their mentors show no respect to the other members
feelings about it.
It is possible to respect other's feelings without agreeing with
them. That's the case here.
On Jul 18, 2006, at 11:04 AM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote:
So you wouldn't mind of mine humble non binding -1
vote. Like said, I don't have nothing against
that project, but like in many things in life
even the ASF seems to behave in the spirit of:
Quod licet Jovi non licet bovi.
On 18 Jul 06, at 11:04 AM 18 Jul 06, Mladen Turk wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote:
So you wouldn't mind of mine humble non binding -1
vote. Like said, I don't have nothing against
that project, but like in many things in life
even the ASF seems to behave in the spirit of:
Quod licet Jovi non licet
Mladen Turk wrote:
So you wouldn't mind of mine humble non binding -1
vote. Like said, I don't have nothing against
that project, but like in many things in life
even the ASF seems to behave in the spirit of:
Quod licet Jovi non licet bovi.
That's very sad :(
Context? To what double
On Jul 18, 2006, at 12:06 PM, Mladen Turk wrote:
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Well, I just expressed my opinion as an ASF member, because this
project and their mentors show no respect to the other members
feelings about it.
I don't think there is any disrespect but there may be a
difference of
On Jul 18, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
since some members thinks that insulting our fellows
is actually a great joke, and something one should
be proud off, I'm fine.
Well, let me just say that once a project is within
the incubator,
IMHO, Anyone can say anything he/she wants on any forum. I just
checked my responses to the threads that i posted [1] and i don't see
me asking anyone to change any behavior. If i did, please accept my
apologies. After all, it's a free country.
thanks,
dims
[1]
Craig L Russell wrote:
On Jul 18, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
William Rowe's response to him fairly well summed up the issue(s). I have
relatively little concern regarding castigating projects for failings, even
if the criticism could be expressed more constructively than
On 7/18/06, Craig L Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 18, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
since some members thinks that insulting our fellows
is actually a great joke, and something one should
be proud off, I'm fine.
Well, let me
Craig Russell wrote:
To get very specific, I understand that posting insults on Apache
mailing lists is forbidden.
Correct.
But are you also saying that we expect him to:
no longer post insults regarding any topic on bileblog, or
No, I am not saying that. Personally, I am not narcissistic
Jason,
I am +1 for the project, overall.
I do suggest that we start out with the PPMC of you and the other Mentors,
have you bring Dan and other appropriate people onto the PMC as your first
order of business, and them go about selecting Committers. From what I
recall at ApacheCon, there was
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I do suggest that we start out with the PPMC of you and the other Mentors,
have you bring Dan and other appropriate people onto the PMC [...]
sigh Typo. Hopefully that was obvious. Meant to say PPMC.
--- Noel
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Craig L Russell wrote:
But are you also saying that we expect him to:
no longer post insults regarding any topic on bileblog, or
no longer post insults regarding any Apache project on bileblog, or
no longer post insults regarding any Apache committer on
Hi,
So far we have 8 binding votes and I was wondering what the official
time period was for the voting window? Is it 72 hours as it is for
everything else? Just want to move on to the next phase of the
process if that is permissible at this point. Here are the votes that
have been cast
On 7/17/06, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
So far we have 8 binding votes and I was wondering what the official
time period was for the voting window? Is it 72 hours as it is for
everything else?
AFAICT there is no official position or consensus on this. see this
thread:
On 17 Jul 06, at 7:47 AM 17 Jul 06, robert burrell donkin wrote:
On 7/17/06, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
So far we have 8 binding votes and I was wondering what the official
time period was for the voting window? Is it 72 hours as it is for
everything else?
AFAICT there is
34 matches
Mail list logo
