>>Seems to me that the software grant ought to be PDF'd nicely like the
>>others, and put along side the CLA, so that outside projects have it ready
>>to use when submitting to the Incubator.
>
> there was a reason identified for *not* doing this. if you can wait
> until i come back from lunch and
On Nov 9, 2003, at 3:59 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
At the end a community vote decides the codebase to adopt or we can as
well be left with just one proposal.
This is what I had in mind from the beginning; what do you think?
Repo != a codebase. Its just a spec.
I don't think 'forced convergen
On Nov 9, 2003, at 1:52 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
We need CPAN, or apt-get, or fink, or something slightly more
dependency aware but not so much so that we sit on our thumbs waiting
for it to happen.
... there are no methods of storing large objects more efficient than
a modern
filesystem. St
Jason van Zyl wrote:
On Sat, 2003-11-08 at 16:07, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
...
What I meant is not about implementation, but about doing things
collaboratively rather than in competition.
Hopefully this can start with the repository effort. We've got Ruper,
Greebo and Wagon (Michal's refactoring
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
My idea of collaboration is something *totally* different.
It sure can be once you get rid of anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Neither of you has the most perfect record on collaboration. Fine. Please
drop it and focus on the actual task to be addressed. Sniping at each
> > My idea of collaboration is something *totally* different.
> It sure can be once you get rid of anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Neither of you has the most perfect record on collaboration. Fine. Please
drop it and focus on the actual task to be addressed. Sniping at each other
is not go
