APACHE INCUBATOR PROJECT STATUS: -*-indented-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2005-11-24 00:30:24 -0500 (Thu, 24 Nov 2005) $]
Web site: http://Incubator.Apache.Org/
Wiki page: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/
[note: the Web site is the 'official' documentation; the wiki
Brian McCallister wrote:
[ -1 ] - IP Clearance needs to be preceded by a proposal posted to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] as well
A PMC isn't allowed to discuss wanting to bring code in?
[ +1 ] - IP Clearance has to be OK'ed by Incubator PMC VOTE (before code
gets checked in to a sponsoring project's
On Jan 11, 2006, at 6:28 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
[ -1 ] - Any proposal should hit [EMAIL PROTECTED] first, No PR
before that.
[ -1 ] - Any PR should be vetted by PRC, No Excuses.
If this includes blogging about it (which recently was an issue) then
it won't work, regardless of what we
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> [ ] - IP Clearance has to be OK'ed by Incubator PMC VOTE (before code
> gets checked in to a sponsoring project's SVN)
As previously noted, I think that it has to be OK'd by *SOME* PMC's vote,
but perhaps that could be either the Incubator or the importing PMC.
HOW
For future uses, PLEASE follow RFC 2119 when writing such guidelines. If we
are going to codify, let's be precise.
Vote and comments below.
--- Noel
> [-1] - Any proposal should hit [EMAIL PROTECTED] first, No PR before that.
This conflates two issues. The PR issue is addressed by the
On 1/11/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One other question to help narrow the project's scope a little: Is the
> 'search server' written entirely from scratch or is it using servlets or
> some other Java HTTP container?
Solr is currently implemented as a webapp for a servlet con
On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 09:21:49AM -0800, Doug Cutting wrote:
> I propose that we accept the CNET's Solr project into the incubator.
>
> Discussion on this list evidenced broad interest in this project, which
> bodes well for its ability to build a developer community.
>
> The Lucene PMC would b
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 09:28:51AM -0500, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Let's VOTE for the following changes to incubator processes (majority
> rules, no vetos). Anyone can vote, but only the PMC member vote's are
> binding. If you want to bring up an issue, PLEASE DON'T hijack this
> threa
On Wed, Jan 11, 2006 at 08:30:59AM -0500, Erik Hatcher wrote:
> That's a good policy, Brian.
Not really. Votes like this are about whether the proposal conforms to our
standards and consequently executing the Incubator PMC's oversight
responsibilities - that is, everything about the proposal is i
+1 - Any proposal should hit [EMAIL PROTECTED] first, No PR before that.
You state 'should'. Reality dictates mistakes will be made on this point.
+1 - Any PR should be vetted by PRC, No Excuses.
Although it's the PRC that dictates PRC policy.
-1 - Any new proposal should have 3 ASF Members /
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Folks,
Let's VOTE for the following changes to incubator processes (majority
rules, no vetos). Anyone can vote, but only the PMC member vote's are
binding. If you want to bring up an issue, PLEASE DON'T hijack this
thread, but start a new one. As usual use +1/+0/-0/-1 not
Folks,
Let's VOTE for the following changes to incubator processes (majority
rules, no vetos). Anyone can vote, but only the PMC member vote's are
binding. If you want to bring up an issue, PLEASE DON'T hijack this
thread, but start a new one. As usual use +1/+0/-0/-1 notation.
[ ] - Any proposal
That's a good policy, Brian.
+1 myself, as I do plan to work with Solr.
Erik
On Jan 10, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Brian McCallister wrote:
+0 (would be +1 but I am trying not to +1 anything which I cannot
commit time to help with)
I will use it, though =)
-Brian
On Jan 10, 2006, at 1:3
Good Advice either way
:)
Gav...
| Sam Ruby wrote:
| >
| > Try NOT to ever get defensive.
|
| Even when you accidentally copy a public mailing list when you meant to
| send a private reply. ;-)
|
| - Sam Ruby
|
| -
| To unsu
Sam Ruby wrote:
Try NOT to ever get defensive.
Even when you accidentally copy a public mailing list when you meant to
send a private reply. ;-)
- Sam Ruby
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional comman
To whom it may concern:
Enclosed please find a revised contribution proposal for the Ajax Toolkit which
takes into account the principal feedback that we have received to date. We
welcome a further dialog on the merits of this submission.
Thank you for your consideration.
Regards
Ross
Ross Dargahi wrote:
To whom it may concern:
Enclosed please find a revised contribution proposal for the Ajax
Toolkit which takes into account the principal feedback that we have
received to date. We welcome a further dialog on the merits of this
submission.
Because this was sent by someon
17 matches
Mail list logo
