Re: [VOTE] Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Third Try)

+1 ...ant On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > I think the vote is still up... > > @Incubator folks: please review the bit. Kevan and I already voted +1 ... > > -M > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu > wrote: >> Now, >> >> Kevan Miller (+1 Binding) >> M

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Third Try)

I think the vote is still up... @Incubator folks: please review the bit. Kevan and I already voted +1 ... -M On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Gurkan Erdogdu wrote: > Now, > > Kevan Miller (+1 Binding) > Matthias Wessendorf (+1 Binding) > Sebastian Bazley (+ 0 Binding) > > Is the above votes eno

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Third Try)

On 01/06/2009, Gurkan Erdogdu wrote: > Now, > > Kevan Miller (+1 Binding) > Matthias Wessendorf (+1 Binding) > Sebastian Bazley (+ 0 Binding) Mine is not binding. > Is the above votes enough to create release ? Or one more +1 is still > necessary ? > > -- Gurkan > > > > > > __

RE: [VOTE] Approve the M1 release of Apache Stonehenge (third try)

Correction: I can add a comment just not in the header. The first place to put an AL header is at the code block. I can add it there. Drew -Original Message- From: Drew Baird (Volt) [mailto:a-dre...@microsoft.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 12:09 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Su

asc.md5 and asc.sha1 (Was: [VOTE] Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Third Try))

Hi, On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 9:21 PM, sebb wrote: > The .asc.md5 and .asc.sha1 files should be deleted from the plugins > directory tree before deployment, as they serve no useful purpose. These files are automatically produced by the interaction between Maven and the Maven GPG plugin. The proper

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Third Try)

Now, Kevan Miller (+1 Binding) Matthias Wessendorf (+1 Binding) Sebastian Bazley (+ 0 Binding) Is the above votes enough to create release ? Or one more +1 is still necessary ? -- Gurkan From: sebb To: general@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, June 1, 200

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Third Try)

+0 Two files don't have AL headers: openwebbeans-1.0.0-incubating-M2-site.xml samples-1.0.0-incubating-M2-site.xml I'm not sure what these files are for. The .asc.md5 and .asc.sha1 files should be deleted from the plugins directory tree before deployment, as they serve no useful purpose. The l

RE: [VOTE] Approve the M1 release of Apache Stonehenge (third try)

I was unable to add a comment to this file. The file does not allow comments and it is machine generated. -Original Message- From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 11:15 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Approve the M1 release of Apache S

Re: [VOTE] Approve the M1 release of Apache Stonehenge (third try)

+0. There should probably be an AL header in the file: stocktrader/dotnet/trader_client/Trade/Global.asax but IMO this is not a blocker. Please fix for the next release. == The site index.html does not appear to have a link to the license; there is a file called license.html but it does not se

[VOTE] Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Third Try)

Hi; I have corrected the errors. New artifacts can be found at the below URLs. OpenWebBeans will be an ASL-licensed implementation of the Web Beans Specification which is defined as JSR-299. Proposed released artifacts are: Plugins repository -- http://people.apache.or

Re: [VOTE] Approve the M1 release of Apache Stonehenge (third try)

+1 On Jun 1, 2009, at 2:43 AM, Selvaratnam Uthaiyashankar wrote: Hi, The Apache Stonehenge community has voted for the M1 release of Apache Stonehenge. We are now asking the approval from the Incubator PMC to publish the release. Stonehenge is a set of example applications for Service Oriente

Re: [VOTE] CANCEL Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Second Try)

On 01/06/2009, Gurkan Erdogdu wrote: > JSF Facelet license is Apache License, Version > 2.0. Ah, I found it eventually on http://facelets.dev.java.net/. [BTW, when I searched for jsf-facelets-1.1.14.jar I found it in various repos; one of them - http:

Re: [VOTE] CANCEL Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Second Try)

JSF Facelet license is Apache License, Version 2.0. Is it still required to mention it in the N&L? So, the remaining blocker issues is * Notice file content in the jars? * MANIFEST.mf content? (What will be the content of this?) Is it OK? I will corre

Re: [VOTE] Release OpenWebBeans 1.0.0-incubating-M2(Second Try)

I get the following for "svn info" URL: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openwebbeans/tags/openwebbeans-1.0.0-incubating-M2 ... Last Changed Rev: 780477 ... So we agree. == The top-level NOTICE and LICENSE files are fine now. The licenses/ directory should now be removed from SVN and

Re: Apache JSecurity/Ki rename - choose your favorite!

-1 Aseca, it sounds like Maseca (the corn flower), and looks too much like Acegi. -1 Toran, too close to Torah or Koran (Qur'an) which makes me feel like it's some sort of religious thing. +1 Shiro, just because it seems like it has the best chance of winning over the above two. My first pick wou

Re: Apache JSecurity/Ki rename - choose your favorite!

+1 for Apache Shiro Thanks, Ashok