On Feb 21, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Leo Simons wrote:
On Feb 21, 2007, at 1:08 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
One thing that seems to have been forgotten is that an approved
release must be in the form of SOURCE CODE and must be placed
in the associated PMC's public distribution area under
http://www.a
On Feb 21, 2007, at 1:08 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
One thing that seems to have been forgotten is that an approved
release must be in the form of SOURCE CODE and must be placed
in the associated PMC's public distribution area under
http://www.apache.org/dist/
The second "must" there in tha
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> The question is whether or not an entity which is not an
> official ASF "project" (a podling) can release code that is
> an official release. IMO, the answer is NO
SO ... anything the podling wants to consider for release belongs in
incubator.a.o/dev/dist/podling/ (or a
Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> The question is whether or not an entity which is not an
> official ASF "project" (a podling) can release code that is
> an official release. IMO, the answer is NO and that is
> why the Incubator is, in fact, the "releasing" entity. So
> YES, it is "official" since the Inc
On Feb 20, 2007, at 8:56 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 2/20/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The "associated PMC" would be the Incubator, and you might notice
that there
is not an incubator/ directory under those locations.
As I understand it, the primary issue is that there
I guess, i am not in favor of blurring the lines. Is this a vote?
thanks,
-- dims
On 2/21/07, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ignoring other parts of the thread,
I'm strongly +1 to Incubator releases being treated as normal ASF
releases at an infrastructure level.
Both in terms of th
Ignoring other parts of the thread,
I'm strongly +1 to Incubator releases being treated as normal ASF
releases at an infrastructure level.
Both in terms of the distributions going into
/www/www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ and the maven2 incubator
repository being closed down and merged into the o
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2007, at 7:11 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> Yes - it merits discussion, but what's happened several times with the
>> usual push-pull of the discussion here is that half the podlings race
>> off to the left while half of them are still on the right, and i
On Feb 20, 2007, at 7:11 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
In other words, we agree there is probably an export issue to resolve,
however /dist/incubator/ does not exist for a reason, and it would be
helpful if you ran changes to the incubator past the incubator PMC
before confusing our podlings w
In other words, we agree there is probably an export issue to resolve,
however /dist/incubator/ does not exist for a reason, and it would be
helpful if you ran changes to the incubator past the incubator PMC
before confusing our podlings with contradictory information.
Yes - it merits discussion,
On 2/20/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The "associated PMC" would be the Incubator, and you might notice that there
is not an incubator/ directory under those locations.
As I understand it, the primary issue is that there has been a lot of
emphasis to say that Incubator releases
Roy,
> At various times, various people have stated various rather
> incongruent descriptions of what has to be done when a podling
> performs a release
> One thing that seems to have been forgotten is that an approved
> release must be in the form of SOURCE CODE and must be placed
> in the assoc
12 matches
Mail list logo
