I just kicked off the PMC membership recruiting thread.
I think there are three more immediate things we need to do:
0) decide on a name for the new project
1) agree on initial PMC chair
2) draft a board resolution to form the new project
Post-2), there will be lots of fun to have - scm, web sit
2016-01-20 14:40 GMT+01:00 Phil Steitz :
> I think the next logical step is to determine who the members of the
> new PMC and the new PMC chair will be. That information will need
> to go in a Board resolution to actually form the new TLP. I suggest
> that we start by asking for PMC volunteers a
I think the next logical step is to determine who the members of the
new PMC and the new PMC chair will be. That information will need
to go in a Board resolution to actually form the new TLP. I suggest
that we start by asking for PMC volunteers among the Commons
Committers. Are others OK with t
Oh, I suppose you're right :) For some reason, I had it in my mind that he
called a vote and not just a discussion. My bad.
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 11:41 AM Gary Gregory
wrote:
> I did not know this was an official vote thread ;-) in any case, I do not
> feel strongly for or against it.
>
> Ga
I did not know this was an official vote thread ;-) in any case, I do not
feel strongly for or against it.
Gary
On Jan 15, 2016 5:21 AM, "James Carman" wrote:
> You didn't really register a vote here, Gary. I take it this is a -1
> against moving TLP?
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 8:24 PM Gary Gr
You didn't really register a vote here, Gary. I take it this is a -1
against moving TLP?
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 8:24 PM Gary Gregory wrote:
> I like having [math] in Commons. There are other multi-module projects in
> Commons, that's not an issue IMO, just good project design.
>
> My main worr
So, do we count this as a +1 for Math to go TLP?
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 9:04 PM Ole Ersoy wrote:
> I love the idea. I also think commons will get a lot more eye balls if it
> gets all the repositories on github and enables the watch button as well as
> github issues.
>
> Cheers,
> Ole
>
> On 0
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:50 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> I would like to propose that we split [math] out into a top level
> project at the ASF. This has been proposed before, and I have
> always come down on the side of staying in Commons, but I am now
> convinced that it is a good step for us to
"Luc Maisonobe"
> An: "Commons Developers List"
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 14. Januar 2016 11:58:47
> Betreff: Re: [math] TLP
>
> Hi Phil,
>
> Le 14/01/2016 01:50, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> > I would like to propose that we split [math] out into a top leve
Hi folks,
+1 for going TLP (non-binding)
And the luck for Luc :-)
Siegfried Goeschl
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
Von: "Luc Maisonobe"
An: "Commons Developers List"
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 14. Januar 2016 11:58:47
Betreff: Re: [math] TLP
Hi Phil,
Le 14/01/2016 01:50,
Hi Phil,
Le 14/01/2016 01:50, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> I would like to propose that we split [math] out into a top level
> project at the ASF. This has been proposed before, and I have
> always come down on the side of staying in Commons, but I am now
> convinced that it is a good step for us to t
... and it looks like watch notifications for these are now enabled. Issues
are still going through JIRA though.
Cheers,
Ole
On 01/13/2016 08:16 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
Commons projects that use Git like Math and Lang are already mirrored on
GitHub,
See:
https://github.com/apache/commons-ma
Commons projects that use Git like Math and Lang are already mirrored on
GitHub,
See:
https://github.com/apache/commons-math
https://github.com/apache/commons-lang
Gary
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Ole Ersoy wrote:
> I love the idea. I also think commons will get a lot more eye balls if
I love the idea. I also think commons will get a lot more eye balls if it gets
all the repositories on github and enables the watch button as well as github
issues.
Cheers,
Ole
On 01/13/2016 07:24 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
I like having [math] in Commons. There are other multi-module projects
I like having [math] in Commons. There are other multi-module projects in
Commons, that's not an issue IMO, just good project design.
My main worry is more on the overall health of Commons or perception that
[math] is "leaving" Commons, the more eyeballs on Commons the better.
Gary
On Wed, Jan 1
+1
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:50 PM Phil Steitz wrote:
> I would like to propose that we split [math] out into a top level
> project at the ASF. This has been proposed before, and I have
> always come down on the side of staying in Commons, but I am now
> convinced that it is a good step for us t
I would like to propose that we split [math] out into a top level
project at the ASF. This has been proposed before, and I have
always come down on the side of staying in Commons, but I am now
convinced that it is a good step for us to take for the following
reasons:
0) We have several committers
On 08/27/2013 08:23 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Am 27.08.2013 15:57, schrieb Phil Steitz:
>> On 8/27/13 6:31 AM, James Carman wrote:
>>> It was mentioned the other day, so I thought I would propose a formal
>>> discussion. Is it time to let [math] "leave the nest"? I would doubt
>>> there are very
Don't you can conclude that matter, shut the f*** up, and enjoy the
last days of summer? ;)
---
TIA, Rodion
James Carman писал 29.08.2013 05:46 PM:
To be clear, I don't really care one way or the other. I just
thought
it was probably good to have a formal discussion on the matter. I'm
also
To be clear, I don't really care one way or the other. I just thought
it was probably good to have a formal discussion on the matter. I'm
also a math geek, so I like reading the emails sometimes (sometimes
they're way over my head too). It takes me back to my college days.
:) I would probably s
Hello.
James, it's good that you bring this up here. This is something I've
been
thinking about lately.
I agree that the mathematical knowledge that seems to be necessary to
dig
into [MATH] goes beyond what you learn in Computer Science courses at
university. I usually skip discussions abo
Hi,
James, it's good that you bring this up here. This is something I've been
thinking about lately.
I agree that the mathematical knowledge that seems to be necessary to dig
into [MATH] goes beyond what you learn in Computer Science courses at
university. I usually skip discussions about math bu
Le 27/08/2013 20:23, Oliver Heger a écrit :
> Am 27.08.2013 15:57, schrieb Phil Steitz:
>> On 8/27/13 6:31 AM, James Carman wrote:
>>> It was mentioned the other day, so I thought I would propose a formal
>>> discussion. Is it time to let [math] "leave the nest"? I would doubt
>>> there are very
Am 27.08.2013 15:57, schrieb Phil Steitz:
> On 8/27/13 6:31 AM, James Carman wrote:
>> It was mentioned the other day, so I thought I would propose a formal
>> discussion. Is it time to let [math] "leave the nest"? I would doubt
>> there are very many of us qualified to work on such a library her
On 8/27/13 6:31 AM, James Carman wrote:
> It was mentioned the other day, so I thought I would propose a formal
> discussion. Is it time to let [math] "leave the nest"? I would doubt
> there are very many of us qualified to work on such a library here in
> Commons. I have a degree in Mathematics
Hi All:
I'm only a casual [math] user (we use [math] at work for some *very* simple
things), but I hope that we, the wider [commons] community, has been
beneficial in sharing expertise in Java, design, and other non-mathematics
but programming related issues. That whole thread about exceptions a w
It was mentioned the other day, so I thought I would propose a formal
discussion. Is it time to let [math] "leave the nest"? I would doubt
there are very many of us qualified to work on such a library here in
Commons. I have a degree in Mathematics, but I haven't used the
advanced math in such a
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
> (apologies for jumping in half way through)
>
> luc.maison...@free.fr wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Considering the ongoing discussion in another thread, the current changes
>> that have been done on
>> [math] for the last months belong to
That's a very good idea IMO.
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
> (apologies for jumping in half way through)
>
> luc.maison...@free.fr wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Considering the ongoing discussion in another thread, the current changes
>> that have been done on
>> [math]
Luc Maisonobe wrote:
Rahul Akolkar a écrit :
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
(apologies for jumping in half way through)
luc.maison...@free.fr wrote:
Hello,
Considering the ongoing discussion in another thread, the current changes that
have been
Rahul Akolkar a écrit :
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
> wrote:
>> (apologies for jumping in half way through)
>>
>> luc.maison...@free.fr wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Considering the ongoing discussion in another thread, the current changes
>>> that have been done on
>>> [
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
> (apologies for jumping in half way through)
>
> luc.maison...@free.fr wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Considering the ongoing discussion in another thread, the current changes
>> that have been done on
>> [math] for the last months belong to
(apologies for jumping in half way through)
luc.maison...@free.fr wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Considering the ongoing discussion in another thread, the current changes
> that have been done on
> [math] for the last months belong to the major changes with large
> incompatibilities with previous version
33 matches
Mail list logo
