It must be sooo frustrating for new projects coming in. They read the
websites, read the mail archives, talk to loads and loads of people,
and when they think they get it all right they send in a proposal. And
then, more often than not, someone somewhere within the ASF sees
"something" that is som
+1 (non-binding).
-Adi
On 8/3/06, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I believe all open questions about the Glasgow proposal (originally
submitted as "Blaze") have now been addressed enough to call a vote
for accepting the project for incubation.
Therefore, as the champion of this projec
On Aug 7, 2006, at 12:49 PM, Kim van der Riet wrote:
I have been somewhat surprised at the amount of debate surrounding the
name of the proposed Glasgow project.
Same here, and I've been on this alias for over a year. Most of the
discussion earlier has been over infringement issues, not
a
On 8/7/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So we no longer do names like "Apache SOAP" because they give the
impression that there can be just one and only on implementation of the
technology in Apache.
I know changing the name is a *really* tough thing for Jini. However, is
Jini
On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 10:55 -0700, Leo Simons wrote:
> FWIW your private discussion (where Geir and me where CCed) was not a "crime"
> (yes I saw the smiley!). The ASF understands how hard it can sometimes be to
> "interface" open source projects to the corporate world.
Absolutely +1.
> Yet it wo
On 8/7/06, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Was there any resolution/agreement on this thread? Any actions taken (like
creation of the incubating repositories)?
The Yoko project was asked to publish some SNAPSHOT's (by another apache
project BTW), but they're not sure what to put in the
On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 14:13 -0400, Jim Hurley wrote:
>
> We did start considering alternative names, but there's a strong
> reluctance to changing names. That's primarily because of the name
> recognition we've built up around the technology and Community
> during the past number of years, as well
Johan Compagner wrote:
> The feeling i get from the mail below is that incubator releases
> are not really meant for all end users.. You really only want
> the users that really knows that it is an incubator release.
> But for me wicket-2.0 will be a full release a real release that
> every user
On 8/7/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
SOP effective when? http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/WicketProposal surely
doesn't. Citations please, or are you just being inventive ;-?
Look at most of the prior proposals - they have affiliations listed.
It's especially more import
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 8/7/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It's not complicated, folks. ASF projects consist of individuals.
>> Adding company affiliations after each of the initial committers names
>> suggests, to some, that the day they move on to another company t
William,
I have made some edits to the wiki on the Mechanisms for feedback
section to clean up the
language, based on some of the misunderstanding and to reflect the
discussion from the list
onto the wiki. Tried to keep it short, but can edit more in if required.
Carl.
William A. Rowe, Jr.
I placed company names after names, as the last proposal to get voted on
did not
have company names on it and was requested to add company names. Nothing
more than that.
Carl.
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 8/7/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not complicated, folks. A
On 8/7/06, Kim van der Riet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have been somewhat surprised at the amount of debate surrounding the
name of the proposed Glasgow project. It seems that this project has
become entangled in an issue overdue for discussion within Apache.
Perhaps the emotive issue of using
That's right!
adffaces "solved" the naming during the incubation (still ongoing;))
But... you should note that the code donation came from Oracle,
so no "naming issues" (on adf faces) on this side.
I am not really sure what happens when you call your incubation
project "vista" or "netweaver" fo
Kim,
I am not an Incubator PMC member, but past experience over the last
few months shows that the name is not a barrier to entry for the
Incubator.For example, ADFFaces is an incubating project with a
name trademarked by Oracle, and part of the incubating process has to
been to change that n
On 8/7/06, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yep -- it's been fun for me to watch us go back and forth on this as I
try to advise people outside the ASF on what the best thing to do is
(since every proposer I've run into really actually wants to do the
most acceptable thing).
not so m
I have been somewhat surprised at the amount of debate surrounding the
name of the proposed Glasgow project. It seems that this project has
become entangled in an issue overdue for discussion within Apache.
Perhaps the emotive issue of using (another) proper noun has sparked a
much-needed debate. I
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> I'm sorry, but respectfully -1 this proposal as written. My specific
> objection
> is to the language below, I don't see anything otherwise objectionable in the
> proposal.
>
> The ASF does not recognize corporate members; all of our contributions are
> measured o
Was there any resolution/agreement on this thread? Any actions taken (like
creation of the incubating repositories)?
The Yoko project was asked to publish some SNAPSHOT's (by another apache
project BTW), but they're not sure what to put in their
distributionManagement section of the poms.
This discussion reminds me of the legal case that McDonalds brought
against a small coffee shop in Half Moon Bay who had been doing
business for 20 years as McCoffee's. Once McD discovered that they
could claim any food-related trademark beginning with Mc, their
lawyers were off in hot purs
Could an account please be created for Raymond, as he has been voted
a committer?
9 +1s
No -1s
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200608.mbox/%
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Preferred userid: 1) rfeng 2) raymondfeng
Full name: Zhaohui Feng (Raymond)
Forwarding email address: [EMAIL
Hi Matthias-
Just to clarify the Jini area on Java.net (jini.dev.java.net)...
the projects there are shared and/or collaborative works that
primarily build on the core infrastructure (that would be in the
Apache Jini project). Those projects include: tools, containers,
abstraction frameworks, int
On 8/7/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/7/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's not complicated, folks. ASF projects consist of individuals. Adding
> company affiliations after each of the initial committers names suggests, to
> some, that the day they
On 8/7/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's not complicated, folks. ASF projects consist of individuals. Adding
company affiliations after each of the initial committers names suggests, to
some, that the day they move on to another company their contribution to the
project e
On Aug 7, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
So whatever happened to the Jini proposal?? I just remembered that
there
was a lot of discussion but don't recall the conclusion.
Sorry - we hit a snag around the name, and have been working to
try and get untangled.
There seemed to be
Carl Trieloff wrote:
>
>> But to the extent that ASF contributors offer productive growth and
>> formative input into the specification, the way this section is phrased
>> is not acceptable. If the contributor wish[es], and if under these terms
>> their contributions merits participation, that con
On 8/3/06, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please vote on the Glasgow proposal, as described below, which can
also be found at:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/GlasgowProposal?action=recall&rev=1.
+1
i do have a few comments
i agree with the substance of a couple of important poi
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 06:46:58PM +0200, Mark Brouwer wrote:
> We had some discussions 'in private' how to deal with this [1] and
> concluded last Friday to proceed this in [EMAIL PROTECTED] I expect Jim
> Hurley to follow up soon as he represents the owner of the trademark.
>
> [1] which by now
Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
I think they ended up at java.net (see [1]). Last week or so I saw
that and was wondering myself, b/c of the proposal here.
Hi,
The current distribution of the JTSK (the Jini Starter Kit) has shown up
at java.net but that had to do with the old jini.org website closi
On 8/7/06, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 7, 2006, at 6:37 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 09:05:13PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>> the process is democractic - graduation is by election
> ...
>> requirements are assessed democractically
> ...
>
> ple
I think they ended up at java.net (see [1]). Last week or so I saw
that and was wondering myself, b/c of the proposal here.
-Matthias
[1] https://jini.dev.java.net/
On 8/7/06, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So whatever happened to the Jini proposal?? I just remembered that ther
So whatever happened to the Jini proposal?? I just remembered that there
was a lot of discussion but don't recall the conclusion.
Sanjiva.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTE
On 7/30/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem that Roller did was that they took code that was in our
SVN repository, removed the license blocks and relicensed it to LGPL
(I think) and posted it to java.net. In two words, "Uh, no."
Sorry this is a little late in a reply
Tuscany has voted in Kelvin as a committer, could an account be created for
him please.
Preferred userid: kelvin
Full name: Kelvin James Goodson
Forwarding email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Requested Karma for: ws ws-tuscany
ICLA has been submitted and now appears on
http://people.apache.org/~jim/commit
On Aug 7, 2006, at 6:37 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 09:05:13PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the process is democractic - graduation is by election
...
requirements are assessed democractically
...
please stop saying democratic -- its a specific kind of
meritocrat
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
IMHO the incubator should not impose timescales or a schedule on a
project but a project may decide to impose a timescale on itself.
My thought is that a time scale would be part of the proposal. If that
proposal is voted in, it would also mean the time scale is excepted
> -Original Message-
> From: robert burrell donkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, 7 August 2006 4:41 AM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Project Naming (was Re: [VOTE] Accept Glasgow into Incubator)
>
> given the amount of upset caused by names, i think tha
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 09:05:13PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> the process is democractic - graduation is by election
...
> requirements are assessed democractically
...
please stop saying democratic -- its a specific kind of meritocratic, with
merit only measured for things done within/
38 matches
Mail list logo
