For unrelated reasons, I today split out the Apache-ness part of the Maven
release process (still syncing):
http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html
It could still use more work, but that's all I have time for right now if
someone wants to patch it (eg, to explain the paren
Greg Stein wrote:
>
> We're not sure what we'd like to do about website migration right now.
> Discussion is still occurring in the community.
The bottom line is that we are in sync in terms of what aught to move into
ASF and have 'formal recognition' ASAP. E.g. a mailing list is trivial,
svn is
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 00:14, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>...
> On your other subject, svn and lists and site at subversion.apache.org, that
> is a problem but not insurmountable.
>
> If we move 1) the lists to subversion.apache.org [it's just a discussion,
> right? Only publicized on the origin
Greg Stein wrote:
>
> If you want to review *bits* rather than *release process*, then you
> can take a look at trunk/ or the nightlies that we'll soon produce. If
> you want release process *and* Apache-branding, then the svn community
> is not prepared to provide that, nor do I think it necessar
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 22:05, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> Plan: raise an issue, and we fix it.
>>
>> Not sure what else you're looking for.
>
> I was just pointing out that if you want to do the release review
> based on an existing 1.6.x
On Nov 12, 2009, at 9:05 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> Plan: raise an issue, and we fix it.
>>
>> Not sure what else you're looking for.
>
> I was just pointing out that if you want to do the release review
> based on an existing 1.6.
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Plan: raise an issue, and we fix it.
>
> Not sure what else you're looking for.
I was just pointing out that if you want to do the release review
based on an existing 1.6.x release, I wouldn't expect it to be fully
compliant with Apache po
Joe Schaefer asked if he could set up the mailing lists this weekend.
The discussion seemed to end, with no particular opposition, so I
filed an Infrastructure ticket to track the creation of the mailing
lists:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2324
At this time, we're setting up just
Forgot to list the Infrastructure ticket, in case you would like to
follow the migration more closely:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2321
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 13:41, Greg Stein wrote:
> It looks like we might be moving the code repository over on
> Sunday(!). Thus, my query abo
Yup. We have all had different experiences, and I certainly
acknowledge it is possible to have a successful RTC model in place.
The real problem is that there is always a success story for any
position. "See? It works here." And there are *so* many factors that
go into that success, beyond the sim
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:16 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Not a "strong opinion", but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
> ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
> expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
> about making a change and discuss
2009/11/10 Jukka Zitting :
> 3) Increase the amount of mentoring: The lack of mentor time and
> better (not necessarily more) supporting documentation gives
> unnecessary administrational and procedural headaches (failed release
> votes, etc.) to many podlings.
>
> Without more volunteers there's n
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:44, Matthieu Riou
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM, ant elder wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans
> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
> >> >> so
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:44, Matthieu Riou wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM, ant elder wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
>> >> so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
>> >
Thanks, and yes: agreed on the rationale.
And have no fears. We aren't going to back out. And I'm not seeing
that the ASF would boot us. So that just means we need to work through
it :-)
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 19:17, Leo Simons wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> The
It looks like we might be moving the code repository over on
Sunday(!). Thus, my query about source code placement has a finite
window for further discussion :-)
Over the past two days, it sounds like nobody has any particular
object to the svn code being loaded directly to /subversion. (yes, it
i
Eric Evans wrote:
> Sure, but the IPMC is in a position of power, and can impose it's will
> upon the project (including CTR vs. RTC), right?
>
I have no clue whether the IPMC can impose such a decision. But I'm
very, very certain that it should not even consider trying. It's better
to ask the
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:18, Niall Pemberton
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> The Apache Incubator is about EDUCATION. It is about TEACHING podlings
>> how to work here at Apache.
>>
>> It is not about making podlings thoughtlessly follow checklists.
>>
>> It is abo
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:55 AM, ant elder wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:24 AM, ant elder wrote:
> >> So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
> >> by others - great - why not make some of those othe
On Nov 10, 2009, at 10:08 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:56 AM, Jukka Zitting > wrote:
1) Relax the exit criteria: Especially the diversity requirement is a
major barrier for many projects. There have been various calls to
relax the diversity requirements, but so far I se
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 11:36 -0500, Greg Stein wrote:
> > I agree with you, but tabled my protest because in practice what we
> > have is working, doesn't seem to be a barrier to contribution, and >
> > everyone seems happy with it (even the casual contributors).
>
> I wouldn't say "everyone". This
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:24 AM, ant elder wrote:
>> So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
>> by others - great - why not make some of those others committers?
>
> It's a long tail sort of thing.
>
> We fol
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:32, Eric Evans wrote:
> >...
> > I agree with this, and as a Cassandra committer I have in the past
> > protested our use of RTC. However, the current work-flow *in practice*
> > is more about having someone, anyone,
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:32, Eric Evans wrote:
>> I agree with you, but tabled my protest because in practice what we have
>> is working, doesn't seem to be a barrier to contribution, and everyone
>> seems happy with it (even the casual cont
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM, ant elder wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
> >> so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
> >> and since then 99% of the commits have been made by only t
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:24 AM, ant elder wrote:
> So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
> by others - great - why not make some of those others committers?
It's a long tail sort of thing.
We follow the convention Johan suggested of assigning the Jira issue
to t
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:32, Eric Evans wrote:
>...
> I agree with this, and as a Cassandra committer I have in the past
> protested our use of RTC. However, the current work-flow *in practice*
> is more about having someone, anyone, give changes a once over (making
> sure they build, that tests
On Wed, 2009-11-11 at 22:16 -0500, Greg Stein wrote:
> Not a "strong opinion", but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
> ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
> expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
> about making a change and discuss
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
>> so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
>> and since then 99% of the commits have been made by only two people.
>
> I assume you're referring to Jonathan Ellis a
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +, ant elder wrote:
> so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
> and since then 99% of the commits have been made by only two people.
I assume you're referring to Jonathan Ellis and myself, and I'm not sure
that's exactly fair. There are
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 08:44 +0100, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> I think part of Cassandra's problem is that they do releases directly
> from trunk and don't have a 'stable' et al branch.
No, this isn't (has never been) true.
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/cassandra/branches/
The cassa
> Why not sent it through bo...@? All Chairs are subscribed to that
> list, several board members have in the past raised concerns about the
> releases created using maven. This would unequivocally show that maven
> has delivered a working solution, and notify all PMC chairs of the
> general Apache
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:16 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Not a "strong opinion", but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
> ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
> expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
> about making a change and discussi
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Not a "strong opinion", but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
> ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
> expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
> about making a change and discussi
Michael Wechner wrote:
Ian Boston schrieb:
not least because committed mistakes demand fixing by the committer
and then anyone who can fix the bug. The only downside is that
occasionally trunk wont build/run and if trunk is close to production
that probably matters.
I think another downsi
Ian Boston schrieb:
not least because committed mistakes demand fixing by the committer
and then anyone who can fix the bug. The only downside is that
occasionally trunk wont build/run and if trunk is close to production
that probably matters.
I think another downside is, that (maybe depen
On 12 Nov 2009, at 03:16, Greg Stein wrote:
Not a "strong opinion", but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
about making a change and discussing it. But y
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> Actually, the vote was kind of withdrawn to update it to new descriptors.
> Thus, its not available yet. In anycase, no need to spam all the PMCs,
> especially those not using Maven. Just keep an eye on the annou...@maven
> list. When av
38 matches
Mail list logo
