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 t
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:
http:
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 i
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 that
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
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 t
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.
I
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
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
opinion but that's not the same thing. There's always
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 opi
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, and someone is on the PPMC, things
> become
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, an
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] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=in
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 acerbic
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.
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 "narcissi
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 som
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 [...]
<> 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 o
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 se
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 p
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 abo
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
> d
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 busine
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
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Dan Diephouse wrote:
We have 4 mentors already,
and from a logistical standpoint I find it hard to keep up with. Each
mentor tends to have a different opinion or different input. While more
input can be great, it can easily get to the point of overload and
impedes Gettin
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Dan Diephouse wrote:
We have 4 mentors already,
and from a logistical standpoint I find it hard to keep up with. Each
mentor tends to have a different opinion or different input. While
more
input can be great, it can easily get to the point
Sanjiva,
It's pretty clear from all the conversations during Apachecon that
folks don't believe in people who are wearing their Apache hats or at
least us when we wear one. It's also clear at least to me that they
don't want any input or rather interference in matters technical
either (at least l
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
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 t
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.
>
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 sayi
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]
Why is there a difference? I am not an Axis committer. Just because I've
become a ws-commons doesn't mean I have a responsibility to participate
in Axis, Tuscany, or any number of other projects. If so, I would feel
especially bad for the Jakarta folks. Furthermore, I started
participating on t
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.
-- dims
On 7/21/06, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why is there a difference? I am not an Axis committer. Just because I've
become a ws-commons doesn't
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.
-- dims
On 7/21/06, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-07-19 at 21:28 -0400, Dan Diephouse wrote:
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,
>> a
41 matches
Mail list logo
