+1 from me. sorry for the delay.
-- dims
On 8/17/06, Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/15/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i'm +1
Ok, that's one from Robert and one from me, does anyone else on the
PMC care to chime in?
-garrett
---
Oh, please. We've had a fraction of the outages experienced by either of
them, and if I take into account the number of times I have had network
splits, much less been unable to participate in real-time, on Freenode,
compared to the nicely asynchronous nature of e-mail, it isn't even a close
comp
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Eelco Hillenius wrote:
>
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.
>> But ASF has had infras
Eelco Hillenius wrote:
> > > 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.
> But ASF has had infrastructure outages the last
On 8/17/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0.2 release
binary.
We would now like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC to
perform the release.
Release
+1 (again too :)
On 8/18/06, Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 (again) :-)
On Aug 17, 2006, at 3:58 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
> In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
> Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0.2 release
> binary.
>
>
+1
On 8/17/06, Brian McCallister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 (again) :-)
On Aug 17, 2006, at 3:58 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
> In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
> Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0.2 release
> binary.
>
> We would now l
On 8/15/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i'm +1
Ok, that's one from Robert and one from me, does anyone else on the
PMC care to chime in?
-garrett
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additiona
+1 (again) :-)
On Aug 17, 2006, at 3:58 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0.2 release
binary.
We would now like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC to
perform the rele
I gave it a cursory look, and things seem to be in order.
+1
Hiram Chirino wrote:
> In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
> Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0.2 release
> binary.
>
> We would now like to request the permission of the Incubat
In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0.2 release
binary.
We would now like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC to
perform the release.
Release notes:
http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/activemq-4
The vote took place on ServiceMix ppmc list.
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hey guys,
as mentioned in [1] we discussed on the PPMC a nominee for a new
committer - Simon Lessard. The real vote takes place on the public
adffaces dev list. This mail is to keep the IPMC updated, as mentioned
in [1].
I'll start this vote *after* this mail has been sent ;-)
-Matthias
[1] ht
On 17/08/06, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think a key question in the "how" category is how to make IRC (or IM
in general) discussions easily accessible to people "who weren't
there"
... or who cannot be "there".
-
> -Original Message-
> From: Jukka Zitting [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, 17 August 2006 3:29 PM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: IRC Channel?
>
> Hi,
>
> On 8/17/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If ASF is about people rather than procedur
Hi,
On 8/17/06, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If ASF is about people rather than procedures as is regularly stated,
a discussion about IRC in open development should be more about 'how'
and in the context of individual projects than simply denouncing the
technology altogether.
+1
On 8/15/06, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 15, 2006, at 2:38 AM, Ian Holsman wrote:
> It isn't the individuals who make the decision, but the community
> as a whole.
> If they feel more comfortable using X to communicate then fine.
>
> If a individual doesn't like the method th
17 matches
Mail list logo
