On 8/14/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
there seems to be an outstanding issue of there not being properly working
XA transaction manager available as Open Source.
Excerpt from the JOTM website (http://jotm.objectweb.org/):
'15 February 2005: NOTICE
The JOTM Team has recent
> Hmm, that's not universally true though - Over the last year or so,
> SF mailing lists have have various /prolonged/ outages whereas
> Freenode IRC has not (as far as I know).
We don't use SF infrastructure.
--- Noel
But ASF has had infrastructure outages the last year, just like
cod
Hi David, Upayavira,
Thanks, I figured it out from the instructions on the site. After I
updated the site it successfully rsync'd to the live site. And now
you can see it too.
Thanks,
Craig
On Aug 16, 2006, at 6:17 PM, David Crossley wrote:
Upayavira wrote:
Craig L Russell wrote:
Ok,
APACHE INCUBATOR PROJECT STATUS: -*-indented-text-*-
Last modified at [$Date: 2006-02-05 04:40:19 -0500 (Sun, 05 Feb 2006) $]
Web site: http://Incubator.Apache.Org/
Wiki page: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/
[note: the Web site is the 'official' documentation; the wiki
Upayavira wrote:
> Craig L Russell wrote:
> > Ok, I took the plunge and built the site. I checked in the updated
> > participation.html page.
>
> Then, IIUC, you ssh to people.apache.org, cd to
> /www/incubator.apache.org/wherever/you/need/to/be, and do an svn up
>
> It may then take a few hours
Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On 16 Aug 06, at 9:40 AM 16 Aug 06, Dion Gillard wrote:
>
>> You mean like this:
>>
>> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/IRC+Log+Design+Discussion+26+May+2005
>>
>>
>
> That particular discussion had everyone who even vaguely knew what the
> issue at hand was, eve
Jason van Zyl wrote:
> On 15 Aug 06, at 12:27 PM 15 Aug 06, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Jan Blok wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> What could be the problem of any real-time communication medium usage
>>> between some community members as long as every one agrees code and
>>> design decisions are m
Gwyn Evans wrote:
> Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
> > IRC BTW is very flaky if you don't have good connection (as most people
> > at AC currently experience). Mail is much better for that because it is
> > not as volatile as IRC.
> Hmm, that's not universally true though - Over the last year or s
James Strachan wrote:
> Brian McCallister wrote:
> > The ActiveMQ committers have decided to aim for TLP status (1)
OK
> > we need to get a PPMC in place. Thus far we have been working
> > under a "committer votes all count" style
> FWIW we've had a PPMC in place for some time ;)
As James note
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> david reid wrote:
>
>> Where is the information you maintain presently?
>
> The site is built from
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/, and the specific
> stuff that you'd be looking for is in multiple locations:
>
> Projects (one file per):
>
What is the real purpose of such a repository if it is not synced to
ibiblio ?
What if a user of an incubating project create an upload request ?
There's no reason why Apache internal policies would affect such a request.
AFAIK, Ibiblio repository is not owned by the ASF ...
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Tis done (Thanks Joe).
It's for Incubator releases and not for snapshots. It's not for 3rd
party jars that the Incubator projects need (these should go in the
snapshot repository).
I'll update the very young repository faq to mention these two new repos:
http://www.apache.org/dev/repository-faq
I have completed the rename on the wiki from Blaze to Glasgow to Qpid. The
updated page (only the name and ASF resources to be setup have changed). The
new page can be found at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/QpidProposal
Project setup can now be done with Qpid for the name and qpid lowercase
On 15 Aug 06, at 12:27 PM 15 Aug 06, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Jan Blok wrote:
Hi,
What could be the problem of any real-time communication medium usage
between some community members as long as every one agrees code and
design decisions are made on the mailing list?
Because the reality is
On Aug 15, 2006, at 12:50 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
:
For example, what if we created [EMAIL PROTECTED] and jinn-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Forget
the question of "how many podlings" --- I am simply talking about a
list
related to specification work, and a list related to implementation.
Is that a
On 16 Aug 06, at 9:40 AM 16 Aug 06, Dion Gillard wrote:
You mean like this:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/IRC+Log+Design+Discussion+26
+May+2005
That particular discussion had everyone who even vaguely knew what
the issue at hand was, even so you only know we talked about it
Craig L Russell wrote:
> But I'd suggest that the com.sun.jini package should change to
> org.apache.newNameForJiniImplementation when it comes over.
I can certainly understand the desire from ASF's perspective
for this to occur. Such a renaming will have an impact on
pretty much all of our exi
Jason,
Here's the text version:
http://www.awpi.com/Combs/Shaggy/A795.html
I had to look up the word turd :)
http://www.answers.com/turd&r=67
-- dims
On 8/16/06, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 16 Aug 06, at 2:24 AM 16 Aug 06, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
>> agreed... without experim
On 16 Aug 06, at 2:24 AM 16 Aug 06, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
agreed... without experimentation we won't know if IRC or VOIP is
better,
and produces a better quality/amount.
Hmm, IIRC, we already experimented on that issue and discovered the
result.
I think it was before your time, but APR
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
The community learns about each other in a shared, non-exclusionary
method. Private Email/IM/IRC does NOT foster that.
Public IRC, free for anyone to join, at a channel that is 'officially'
published/ promoted however, does.
No it doesn't.
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 17:36 -0400, Jim Hurley wrote:
I'm not going to try and pull a Bill Clinton with "it depends what the
definition of "is" is" but I'd answer that I believe the Jini
Community
views the project as *the* Jini implementation.
But *the* as i
Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
> However, the current structure appears to be org.jini.* for APIs and
> com.sun.something.* for implementation. Clearly that structure says
> there can be multiple implementations - and in that case I'm against
> putting the two parts together.
Can you expand on why you
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Either way, separate lists and source control areas.
Many of our specs are done "JDK-style": as javadoc embedded
directly in our implementation. We use javadoc tags to identify
implementation-specific information, such that we can generate
both "spec" and "doc" from a sin
On Aug 16, 2006, at 12:32 AM, James Strachan wrote:
On 8/16/06, Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The ActiveMQ committers have decided to aim for TLP status (1), as
such we need to get a PPMC in place. Thus far we have been working
under a "committer votes all count" style (really, e
You mean like this:
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/IRC+Log+Design+Discussion+26+May+2005
On 8/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jan Blok wrote:
> Hi,
>
> What could be the problem of any real-time communication medium usage
> between some community members as long a
+1
On 14 Aug 06, at 5:03 PM 14 Aug 06, Henri Yandell wrote:
On 8/7/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> people.apache.org/repo/m1-incubating-repository
> people.apache.org/repo/m2-incubating-repository
Noel, shall I go ahead and create the above? They get my +1 from a
repository@ p
On 16/08/06, Henning Schmiedehausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gee, now here is a sensitive subject. :-)
IRC BTW is very flaky if you don't have good connection (as most people
at AC currently experience). Mail is much better for that because it is
not as volatile as IRC.
Hmm, that's not unive
On 8/16/06, Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The ActiveMQ committers have decided to aim for TLP status (1), as
such we need to get a PPMC in place. Thus far we have been working
under a "committer votes all count" style (really, everyone's vote
counts, it is on a public list without
28 matches
Mail list logo
