Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> It then becomes a question of, assuming successful incubation, where
> does the community graduate to? TLP, Felix subproject(s), or elsewhere.
And remember that Felix charter is framed in terms of "the OSGi Service
Platform and other software that is associated with or rel
On Sep 1, 2009, at 2:08 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
On 9/1/09 13:59, Martin Cooper wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Richard S.
Hall wrote:
I'm not sure I understand the issue here. Whether Aries becomes its
own TLP, or a sub-project of Felix or some other TLP, isn't relevant
until th
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 3:57 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 31/08/2009, Luciano Resende wrote:
>> Thanks for all the reviews and feedback for the PhotArk RC2. I have
>> fixed all the severe and blocking issues and have produced a new RC...
>>
>> Please follow the link below for the new RC details :
>>
>>
On 02/09/2009, Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> ok, done
>
> so we should never point to archive.apache.org from the site
You can point to archive.apache.org for archived releases, see for example:
http://tomcat.apache.org/
Download/Archives
or
http://commons.apache.org/downloads/download_lang.
ok, my bad, you can just define the tag when performing the release
using maven, it does not have to be the same as the version. So you
can set the version to 2.0.5-incubating and the tag to
2.0.5-incubating-rc1. So when the release proceeds we can just copy
over that last rc to the final ant promo
ok, done
so we should never point to archive.apache.org from the site
Thanks,
Francis
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:53 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 01/09/2009, Francis De Brabandere wrote:
>> I fixed the empire-db site download links. (might take a few hours for
>> the change to be propagated)
>>
>> http:
On 01/09/2009, Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 5:46 PM, sebb wrote:
> >>
> >> > The new release candidate uses exactly the same name for the artifacts
> >> > and the SVN tag.
> >> >
> >> > This makes it very difficult to determine later what was actually
> voted on.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 5:46 PM, sebb wrote:
>>
>> > The new release candidate uses exactly the same name for the artifacts
>> > and the SVN tag.
>> >
>> > This makes it very difficult to determine later what was actually voted
>> on.
>>
>>
>> Hmm, I don't see how this can be changed when using
On 31/08/2009, Luciano Resende wrote:
> Thanks for all the reviews and feedback for the PhotArk RC2. I have
> fixed all the severe and blocking issues and have produced a new RC...
>
> Please follow the link below for the new RC details :
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-...@incubator.ap
On 01/09/2009, Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> I fixed the empire-db site download links. (might take a few hours for
> the change to be propagated)
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/empire-db/downloads/downloads.htm
>
>
> Still one problem left, the md5 and sha files don't seem to have been
> prop
I fixed the empire-db site download links. (might take a few hours for
the change to be propagated)
http://incubator.apache.org/empire-db/downloads/downloads.htm
Still one problem left, the md5 and sha files don't seem to have been
propagated to the mirrors so I had to point to archive.apache.org
the files are there, it seems the site is pointing to the wrong files
http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/empire-db
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Martijn
Dashorst wrote:
> The Incubator release guide provides guidance:
>
>
> Uploading Artifacts
>
> The distribution upload location (ww
The Incubator release guide provides guidance:
Uploading Artifacts
The distribution upload location (www.apache.org/dist) for all Apache
projects is the /www/www.apache.org/dist directory on
people.apache.org. Each project (including the Incubator) owns a
directory within dist.
The podl
Hi,
2009/9/1 sebb :
> Just noticed that (some) Incubator releases are being made from
> personal directories on people (minotaur).
>
> That does not seem right to me, but perhaps I'm being too picky?
It's not right. Both Infra policy [1] and Incubator policy [2] clearly
say that releases must be
Sebb,
So to sum up, do we still have blocking issues left? I can brew an
other release to fix a few more of those minor issues (they are fixed
in trunk) but I don't know how to do it with a different tag/version.
Francis
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:00 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 01/09/2009, Francis De Bra
On Sep 1, 2009, at 16:38 , Jeremy Hughes wrote:
It is a goal of the Aries project to provide a natural home for open
source implementations of current and future OSGi EEG specifications,
including the opportunity for the collaborative development of
compliance tests, and an environment to demons
On Sep 1, 2009, at 17:45 , Guillaume Nodet wrote:
ACE is another podling related to OSGi and AFAIK it implements the
DeploymentAdmin OSGi spec.
Just to clear up any misconceptions:
ACE does not implement the DeploymentAdmin spec. That was donated to
Felix and ACE uses it.
ACE is an applic
How is it that so many people already use Felix subprojects on other
frameworks if there isn't already some understanding on this already?
Just because some people perceive it to not be that way, doesn't mean we
should throw the baby out with the bathwater. It is a poor argument.
Just starting
Uhhh... So you intend to re-educate the 'masses' in two ways;
1. "NO, NO, NO, Felix is not an OSGi framework, it is a group of OSGi
projects... Apache Foo is an OSGi framework..."
2. "NO, NO, NO, Felix bundles works on other things than Felix, I mean the
Apache Foo..."
Or did I misunderstand som
On 9/1/09 13:59, Martin Cooper wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
I'm not sure I understand the issue here. Whether Aries becomes its
own TLP, or a sub-project of Felix or some other TLP, isn't relevant
until the project is ready to exit incubation. Why does it warra
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:51 AM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
I'm not sure I understand the issue here. Whether Aries becomes its
own TLP, or a sub-project of Felix or some other TLP, isn't relevant
until the project is ready to exit incubation. Why does it warrant
such apparently intense discussion bef
As I said on d...@felix and will repeat here:
I don't agree about renaming the [Felix] TLP. There are so many examples
of similar situations. I cannot believe we are truly in a unique
situation here:
* "Apache" typically means the HTTP Server project, but it also
refers to the f
On 01/09/2009, Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> > Also, just noticed that there is another version of the tutorial in
> > Word format (tutorial.doc).
> >
> > This is stored in SVN alongside tutorial.pdf, but for some reason in
> > the archive the doc file is stored in one of the subdirectories,
I'm not subscribing to d...@felix.a.o at the moment, but would still like to
hear the outcome of this...
Richard, we (you and I at least) have discussed this more than once in the
past and I totally agree with Guillaume that the perception is there, it is
everything and near impossible to change.
> Also, just noticed that there is another version of the tutorial in
> Word format (tutorial.doc).
>
> This is stored in SVN alongside tutorial.pdf, but for some reason in
> the archive the doc file is stored in one of the subdirectories, viz:
> src/empire-db-examples. Not sure why one would need
On 9/1/09 12:14, Guillaume Nodet wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 18:06, Richard S. Hall wrote:
Creating another project to host OSGi spec implementations seems
unnecessary. And, from my point of view, only serves to foster this
mentality that Felix projects are framework specific. I do not b
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 18:06, Richard S. Hall wrote:
>
> Creating another project to host OSGi spec implementations seems
> unnecessary. And, from my point of view, only serves to foster this
> mentality that Felix projects are framework specific. I do not buy your
> argument that we cannot educa
On 31/08/2009, Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Empire-db community has completed working on Release 2.0.5 and is
> now looking for approval of the IPMC to publish the release.
> So far the release has been approved by Empire-db committers, but due
> to vacation time and other circum
I don't think we disagree in principle, but in approach. Apache Felix
was charted to host Apache licensed implementations of OSGi
specifications. So, what makes sense to me is:
1. Having Apache community members work on standard spec
implementations at Apache Felix.
2. Then if those su
Francis I think we can delete that "old" directory tree in the trunk.
Rainer
Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> Re: [VOTE] Release Empire-db version 2.0.5-incubating (take 2)
>
> [inline reply]
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 5:14 PM, sebb wrote:
>
> > The new release candidate uses exactly the same n
The objective is to create a community who focus is to enable
applications to use both OSGi and Java EE capabilities, independent of
either a specific OSGi f/w or a specific enterprise runtime. Given the
Java enterprise focus of Geronimo, we could have proposed a sub-project
there but considere
2009/9/1 Guillaume Nodet :
> Not sure how to articulate my thoughts here.
>
> First, it's not about competing against Felix, though you'll find in the ASF
> multiple competing products (Axis vs CXF to mention only this one) and the
> ASF has never stated as a goal that it would provide a coherent o
I suppose those should be available on the apache mirrors instead? How
do we get them there?
Francis
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 5:27 PM, sebb wrote:
> Just noticed that (some) Incubator releases are being made from
> personal directories on people (minotaur).
>
> That does not seem right to me, but p
2009/9/1 Richard S. Hall :
> The Apache Felix project, since its inception, has been intended to host
> implementations of the OSGi specifications, which includes both the
> framework as well as other standard services. A framework implementation was
> just one of the goals.
>
> This proposal seems
On 01/09/2009, Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> [inline reply]
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 5:14 PM, sebb wrote:
>
> > The new release candidate uses exactly the same name for the artifacts
> > and the SVN tag.
> >
> > This makes it very difficult to determine later what was actually voted on.
Not sure how to articulate my thoughts here.
First, it's not about competing against Felix, though you'll find in the ASF
multiple competing products (Axis vs CXF to mention only this one) and the
ASF has never stated as a goal that it would provide a coherent offer or
anything like this.
The pro
[inline reply]
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 5:14 PM, sebb wrote:
> The new release candidate uses exactly the same name for the artifacts
> and the SVN tag.
>
> This makes it very difficult to determine later what was actually voted on.
Hmm, I don't see how this can be changed when using nexus, the Id
Just noticed that (some) Incubator releases are being made from
personal directories on people (minotaur).
That does not seem right to me, but perhaps I'm being too picky?
Example:
http://incubator.apache.org/empire-db/downloads/downloads.htm
On 31/08/2009, Francis De Brabandere wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Empire-db community has completed working on Release 2.0.5 and is
> now looking for approval of the IPMC to publish the release.
> So far the release has been approved by Empire-db committers, but due
> to vacation time and other circum
The Apache Felix project, since its inception, has been intended to host
implementations of the OSGi specifications, which includes both the
framework as well as other standard services. A framework implementation
was just one of the goals.
This proposal seems to be saying a separate project i
Thanks Guillaume, understood.
Regards
JB
Guillaume Nodet wrote:
Karaf is a runtime, which means it includes the OSGi framework and you can
install it and start it, providing a number of additional features compared
to a plain OSGi framework.
The goal of Aries is not to provide such a runtime, b
Karaf is a runtime, which means it includes the OSGi framework and you can
install it and start it, providing a number of additional features compared
to a plain OSGi framework.
The goal of Aries is not to provide such a runtime, but rather provide
components that can be installed into different ru
Hi Jeremy,
could you spot the differences with Apache Felix/Karaf and the SMX OBR ?
Thanks,
Regards
JB
Jeremy Hughes wrote:
Hi, we would like to propose a new incubator podling called Aries.
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/AriesProposal
Here is a quick summary of the proposal
The Aries pro
Hi, we would like to propose a new incubator podling called Aries.
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/AriesProposal
Here is a quick summary of the proposal
The Aries project will deliver a set of pluggable Java components
enabling an enterprise OSGi application programming model. This
includes imp
44 matches
Mail list logo
