Craig L Russell wrote:
> It seems to me that there is no reason for the PPMC to be official,
> since they have no power to actually release anything (which puts Apache
> at legal risk). It's the Incubator PMC that authorizes releases.
>
> "All the PPMC does" is to exercise podling oversight, which
Could an account please be created for Ignacio, as he has been voted
a committer?
12 +1s
No -1s.
http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg08554.html
Preferred userid: 1) isilval
Full name: Ignacio Silva-Lepe
Forwarding email address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Requested Karma for: ws
It seems to me that there is no reason for the PPMC to be official,
since they have no power to actually release anything (which puts
Apache at legal risk). It's the Incubator PMC that authorizes releases.
"All the PPMC does" is to exercise podling oversight, which should
not legally encumb
On 10/10/06, Jean T. Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/10/06, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi Jean,
>>
>> Your suggestion looks sound to me.
>
> +1
>
>> > Some clarifications are needed on the PPMC page, including:
>> > - the PPMC has no legal standing, so no need for
On 10/10/06, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 9, 2006, at 2:59 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> the source distributions unpacks to the same directory as the binary.
> this is inconvenient for users. it's better to unpack the source to
> incubator-activemq-4.0.2-src.
I disagre
> On 10/10/06, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi Jean,
>>
>> Your suggestion looks sound to me.
>
> +1
>
>> > Some clarifications are needed on the PPMC page, including:
>> > - the PPMC has no legal standing, so no need for board notification
>
> i'm not sure about this. roy seems v
On Oct 10, 2006, at 4:20 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
in practice i think that the PPMC will become the PMC.
Sans the mentors who signed up to help with incubation, but no intent
to participate in project development.
Andrus
--
On 10/10/06, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jean,
Your suggestion looks sound to me.
+1
> Some clarifications are needed on the PPMC page, including:
> - the PPMC has no legal standing, so no need for board notification
i'm not sure about this. roy seems very convinced that
On Oct 9, 2006, at 2:59 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the source distributions unpacks to the same directory as the binary.
this is inconvenient for users. it's better to unpack the source to
incubator-activemq-4.0.2-src.
I disagree with that. Usually, a source distribution should be the
en
+1
Roy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ted Husted wrote:
> By contributing the documentation, you are assigning an non-exclusive,
> non-revocable copywrite to that version of the material.
Essentially correct, but did you mean "copyright license" :?
But yes - not exclusive - you can republish _your_ own contributions under
different l
Hi Jean,
Your suggestion looks sound to me.
Craig
On Oct 10, 2006, at 12:10 PM, Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Given recent PPMC discussions on general@, it has been on my mind
to add a
section titled "Voting in a new PPMC member" to
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html
Brian McCallister
Given recent PPMC discussions on general@, it has been on my mind to add a
section titled "Voting in a new PPMC member" to
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html
Brian McCallister and I chatted about this at the hackathon. Since having
a PPMC is instructional, we think that it would be helpf
On 10/10/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/10/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) we log the chats to the dev list (yes I know we always did)
> 2) If we have any proposals in the chats we explicitly send these out
> as separate notes and follow up in email to m
Justin
I understand your concerns. However, we have switched our model, based
on feedback from the Incubator PMC, and for *our* project, it has been
negative rather than positive. I'm not trying to make a general point,
as I only have one data point.
I don't believe we've ever had the problems y
On 10/10/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, I'd urge against IRC chats, but if you're careful, it can work. -- justin
I agree with Justin's concerns. That said, I've seen carefully
planned and executed IRC chats work very well. That includes having
an agenda and to limit u
IRC works fine for the cases we use it. It is direct feedback that is really
wanted in
discussions. And ofcourse when a code/design thing is discussed the list is
also
asked for it what they think.
i personally can't, or not happy to, do without it. I know what will happen
if we didn't use irc
w
On 10/10/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1) we log the chats to the dev list (yes I know we always did)
2) If we have any proposals in the chats we explicitly send these out
as separate notes and follow up in email to make any decisions. In
other words the IRC chats are not formal d
Folks
I've been revisiting the decision to stop having IRC chats. We did
this, partially based on feedback from the Incubator PMC that felt
perhaps that the chats were leading to a lack of fair discussion on
the email list.
However, I have personally noticed that the community is less vibrant
wi
+1
-Yonik
On 10/9/06, Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Since there hasn't been any significant work on Lucene4c in quite some
time, I'd like to officially mark it as dormant so I don't have to
keep writing board reports that just say "there has been no progress
in the last 3 months".
On 10/10/06, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Oct 9, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> Since there hasn't been any significant work on Lucene4c in quite some
> time, I'd like to officially mark it as dormant so I don't have to
> keep writing board reports that just say "there has
On Oct 9, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
Since there hasn't been any significant work on Lucene4c in quite some
time, I'd like to officially mark it as dormant so I don't have to
keep writing board reports that just say "there has been no progress
in the last 3 months".
does "I" here m
Hi Eric,
From the ASF point of view, it is your responsibility to ensure you
can contribute the thing you're contributing (under CLA and/or CCLA).
From your employer's point of view, this is probably a good question
to ask your lawyer / legal people. Basically you need to make sure
there
George,
I presume "Eric" is referring to :)
The incubator e-mail list isn't the appropriate forum for the Lucene
website topic, so let's take that offline after this message. I'm
copying the Lucene PMC so they can provide you and I with details on
generating the Lucene site, as I'm in th
Thanks... I have now fixed all the files in our distribution. Can we
start the Vote again for releasing yoko milestone 1 release?
Yoko release: http://people.apache.org/~bravi
- Balaji
-Original Message-
From: robert burrell donkin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 200
25 matches
Mail list logo
