On Thu, 2005-12-22 at 21:19 -0800, Ted Leung wrote:
> >
> > Right now, however, all I hear is belly-aching by people who have not
> > been doing any of the Incubator's work, nor that of infrastructure,
> > so have little basis to complain about anything.
>
> I was the mentor and co-sponsor for XML
On Dec 21, 2005, at 12:57 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Dec 21, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a
project in without approval of the incubator PMC? Just look at
the raft of projects being brought in via Geronimo and the WS
PMC
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 08:01:14PM -0800, Jean T. Anderson wrote:
> Incubator Graduation Check List
> ---
>
> [ ] Move svn repo from incubator to new location
> [ ] *** ? *** requests that infrastructure move svn repository
> Should it be made via email to infrastru
This consolidates input from Dims, Craig, David, Dain, and Martin
(thanks, everyone). The original thread starts at
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200512.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
.
I tried to clarify who should do what:
- "PPMC" means the old PPMC for the graduating
Makes sense. Thanks!
-- George
-Original Message-
From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 5:51 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Setting up mailing list for Lucene.Net
George,
2) What are the minimum mailing list that I will n
Hehe. cross checked the ACL's. James should be able to update any
incubator document we have :)
-- dims
On 12/22/05, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/22/05, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Thanks everyone for your comments. We should maybe capture some
On 23.12.2005, at 00:23, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Dec 22, 2005, at 10:53 AM, Erik Abele wrote:
On 21.12.2005, at 21:57, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Dec 21, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a
project in without approval of the incuba
On Dec 22, 2005, at 4:15 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
So, in your opinion, there is never a reason to tell a project, no,
you don't fit here? As long as they (think they) want to be at the
ASF, we should keep moving them in that direction?
That happens when a proposal gets no mentors. It could als
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
--On December 22, 2005 3:26:57 PM -0500 Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
As I look through the list of projects in the incubator, trying to figure
out where I can be useful, I notice several projects that have been in
the incubator for a LONG time.
Which got me t
On Dec 22, 2005, at 10:53 AM, Erik Abele wrote:
On 21.12.2005, at 21:57, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Dec 21, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a
project in without approval of the incubator PMC? Just look at
the raft of projects bein
> > It takes as long as it takes.
> >
> > The only requirement I have is that there is a continued effort towards
> > attracting community. If a project goes completely dormant (i.e. no
> > traffic whatsoever), then yes it can fail and should be terminated.
> >
> > However, placing arbitrary limit
On 12/22/05, Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> > I'd say after X months (6? 12?), there should be a VOTE on incubator
> > PMC whether to continue that project or not.
>
> Ok, so say we went with X=12. There are 13 projects that fit that
> description. Of those, 3 hav
On 12/22/05, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks everyone for your comments. We should maybe capture some of
> the points raised in this thread into the incubation guide?
+1
submit a patch ;)
(been waiting years to say that to james)
AUIU the consensus seems to be that the doc
On 12/22/05, Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> > On 12/21/2005 7:22 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> >
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >> Right now any PMC can automatically ok projects into incubator. How
> >> about we change that rule? So that the only pmc that can approve a
> >>
On 12/22/05, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --On December 22, 2005 3:26:57 PM -0500 Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > As I look through the list of projects in the incubator, trying to figure
> > out where I can be useful, I notice several projects that have been in
> >
George,
2) What are the minimum mailing list that I will need? I am thinking
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do I need
anything else, one for SVN, for example?
OG: I suggest you use "net-dev" and "net-user" for mailing list named, so we
follow the same pattern as with Java Lucene: java
On 12/22/05, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Garrett,
>
> 1) Is this where Jira is:
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa
Yep, that's it. Use the "Mailing Lists" component in the
Infrastructure project.
> 2) What are the minimum mailing list that I will need? I am
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 04:51:42PM -0500, Rich Bowen wrote:
> Ok, so say we went with X=12. There are 13 projects that fit that
> description. Of those, 3 have status updates that date within that X
> month timeframe, leaving 10 that, at least to me, appear to be inactive
> for more than X month
--On December 22, 2005 3:26:57 PM -0500 Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
As I look through the list of projects in the incubator, trying to figure
out where I can be useful, I notice several projects that have been in
the incubator for a LONG time.
Which got me thinking ... is there a gra
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
I'd say after X months (6? 12?), there should be a VOTE on incubator
PMC whether to continue that project or not.
Ok, so say we went with X=12. There are 13 projects that fit that
description. Of those, 3 have status updates that date within that X
month timeframe, lea
Hi Garrett,
1) Is this where Jira is:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa
2) What are the minimum mailing list that I will need? I am thinking
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] Do I need
anything else, one for SVN, for example?
Regards,
-- George
-Original Message--
I'd say after X months (6? 12?), there should be a VOTE on incubator
PMC whether to continue that project or not.
thanks,
dims
On 12/22/05, Rich Bowen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please forgive if this has been discussed in the past. I respond very
> well to "go look in the archives" responses.
On 12/22/05, George Aroush <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Does anyone happen to know how or what I need to do to setup mailing list(s)
> for Lucene.Net? I have been trying to find out how for the past few days
> without much luck.
>
> I am trying to finish off the infrastructure set
Hi Everyone,
Does anyone happen to know how or what I need to do to setup mailing list(s)
for Lucene.Net? I have been trying to find out how for the past few days
without much luck.
I am trying to finish off the infrastructure setup for Lucene.Net under
incubator, and the mailing list is the rem
Please forgive if this has been discussed in the past. I respond very
well to "go look in the archives" responses. However, since folks'
attention seems to be pointed this way, I thought I'd ask.
As I look through the list of projects in the incubator, trying to
figure out where I can be usefu
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On 12/21/2005 7:22 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Folks,
Right now any PMC can automatically ok projects into incubator. How
about we change that rule? So that the only pmc that can approve a
proposal is the incubator PMC.
++1
Without putting too much thought into my re
On 12/21/05, Ted Leung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd love to have a good AJAX project here at Apache, but I'm not at
> all convinced that this is the best way to get it. I also talked to
> Alex Russell at Dojo about coming to the ASF (at this year's OSCON),
> and the overhead thing was already
On 12/22/05, Larry Meadors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 1) We are not in the incubator anymore.
> 2) Odd...not sure what's up with that.
> 3) Probaly will not make that change (and break all those apps) until 3.x
Regarding #3, you might want to check out this current thread:
http://www.nabble.
On Dec 22, 2005, at 2:01 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
The Chairman does not have ultimate authority, and their
PoV or opinion does not count more or less than others,
nor does it mean that their interpretation is the rule :)
Right, but there is clearly a difference of opi
Larry Meadors wrote:
3) Probaly will not make that change (and break all those apps) until 3.x
You are informing new adopters about this ? Since you are forcing them to
change quite quickly after their adoption, even though everyone needs to switch
to the new package naming eventually anyway
On Dec 22, 2005, at 1:55 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Instead, the
question is whether it also has the authority (and
responsibility) to decide who enters Incubation or not.
FWIW, I have never envisioned a case where the Incubator
would be at odds with the desires of the PMCs and
the members. I w
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Are you stating that the Incubator PMC does not currently
> have the ultimate authority on who leaves the incubator
> and who does not?
No, that is clearly an authority delegated by the Board exclusively to the
Incubator.
--- Noel
--
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> The Chairman does not have ultimate authority, and their
> PoV or opinion does not count more or less than others,
> nor does it mean that their interpretation is the rule :)
Right, but there is clearly a difference of opinion, so which part of "the
Board can clarify the in
On 12/21/2005 11:21 PM, Cliff Schmidt wrote:
On 12/21/05, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ted Leung wrote:
On Dec 21, 2005, at 8:22 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I think that the incubation process is setting an incredibly
low bar for access to the Apache brand name
On Dec 22, 2005, at 1:44 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
I'm confused. Are you stating that the Incubator PMC does not
currently have the ultimate authority on who leaves the incubator
and who does not?
Not at all. No one (afaik) denies the fact that the Incubator is
the final arbiter of w
On 21.12.2005, at 21:57, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Dec 21, 2005, at 11:04 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
How is this possible when any other PMC can vote to bring a
project in without approval of the incubator PMC? Just look at
the raft of projects being brought in via Geronimo and the WS
PMC. Th
(for the benefit of those joining the thread, here's the context)
> > On 12/22/05, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > the way people vote are a matter of record and so reputations are at stake
> > both inside and outside apache. voting for a duff release or contributing to
> > a
On 12/22/2005 10:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Dec 22, 2005, at 12:56 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I do understand your point, but as I also understand from the
comments of
both the current ASF Chairman and his predecessor, the Incubator's
authority
comes into play when we vote to release f
On Dec 22, 2005, at 12:56 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I do understand your point, but as I also understand from the
comments of
both the current ASF Chairman and his predecessor, the Incubator's
authority
comes into play when we vote to release from the Incubator, rather
than when
another PM
On 12/21/2005 3:13 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 10:59:11AM +, James Strachan wrote:
On 20 Dec 2005, at 19:33, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
It's not actually a dumb question, but rather one that I always
took for granted... I realized when asked by Alan that we never
Greg Stein wrote:
> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> > Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating
> > project move to the org.apache package?
> I would say "yes".
As would (and did) most others. We should add this to the Incubation
checklist. I don't want to see another mistake made as was
On 12/21/2005 7:22 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Folks,
Right now any PMC can automatically ok projects into incubator. How
about we change that rule? So that the only pmc that can approve a
proposal is the incubator PMC.
Without putting too much thought into my response I think that the
I
On 12/22/05, Larry Meadors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) We are not in the incubator anymore.
> 2) Odd...not sure what's up with that.
if it's wrong, patch it :)
- robert
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additio
James Strachan wrote:
> I don't see why we need to force a major package name
> change on our users.
Branding and consistency. A wrapper package can be used to deprecate the
old names.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mai
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> I think the Incubator would best serve the ASF if we/they had
>>> the ultimate authority to vote on, even if the PMC approves a
>>> proposed project, acceptance.
>>
>> You are entitled to that view, but until the Board forma
1) We are not in the incubator anymore.
2) Odd...not sure what's up with that.
3) Probaly will not make that change (and break all those apps) until 3.x
Larry
On 12/22/05, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> What is the status of iBatis ? On the website (ibatis.apache.or
Hi all,
What is the status of iBatis ? On the website (ibatis.apache.org) it doesn't
say it is in the incubator (unless you look really good), in the status on the
incubator site they are still in incubator and eg in svn eg the packages
haven't changed to use the apache namespace..
Just an ob
On 22 Dec 2005, at 06:36, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Wed, 2005-12-21 at 19:47 -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 11:16:13AM -0800, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Dumb question, is it a requirement that the incubating project
move to
the org.apache package?
I would say "yes".
Bi
Do you mean the incubator PMC or the project PMCs?
I do think that there is much at stake also for the project PMCs
If the projects they bring in don't work out, this will also be a
problem for the project community.
regards,
Martin
On 12/22/05, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
On 12/22/05, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 21, 2005, at 7:46 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
> > Jim Jagielski wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I think the Incubator would best serve the ASF if we/they had
> >> the ultimate authority to vote on, even if the PMC approves a
> >> proposed proj
On Dec 21, 2005, at 7:46 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
I think the Incubator would best serve the ASF if we/they had
the ultimate authority to vote on, even if the PMC approves a
proposed project, acceptance.
You are entitled to that view, but until the Board formally set
On 21 Dec 2005, at 10:50, Ted Leung wrote:
Unfortunately, I don't agree with that.I think that the incubation
process is setting an incredibly low bar for access to the Apache
brand name, and this is a bad thing. Corporations see the value of
the brand name, that's why they want to come
52 matches
Mail list logo
