On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:51:35 -0500
Donald Woods wrote:
> I'm open to suggestions BeanValidation, OpenValidation, Validera, ...
Any of those work for me, though OpenValidation has a hint of the
same problem. BeanValidation might be ideal, and scans better than,
say JSR303-Validation :)
I'm
+1
Niall
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
> Given the lack of response on the proposal and the push from our
> champion to get moving :-), I'll assume lazy consensus and call a vote.
>
> I would like to present for a vote the following proposal to be
> sponsored by the Incuba
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
> Yes. That's how I view it. It's more than code clearance, however. There are
> processes for that, already. Community building is why it is starting off as
> an Incubator project. I think graduating to become Commons Validator v2 is a
> gre
On Feb 24, 2010, at 8:55 AM, James Carman wrote:
> Sorry, didn't read the proposal very closely. The idea was that it
> would be brought into Commons Validator and become the 2.x codebase.
> I like that idea and I would think it would be wise to go through the
> incubator to make sure the codeba
On Feb 23, 2010, at 10:22 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> +1 to accept Validation into the Incubator
>
> afterwards we still can see where it actually ends up
>
> however I for sure want to see this at Apache.
>
> If you guys need a champion or mentor, count me in !!
We have 3 mentors. If y
I'm +1 to bringing this into the incubator with the intention of it
becoming Apache Commons Validator 2.x (per the proposal). I'm willing
to help from the Apache Commons side of things if I can or need to.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
> +1
>
> --kevan
> On Feb 23, 2010, a
Sorry, didn't read the proposal very closely. The idea was that it
would be brought into Commons Validator and become the 2.x codebase.
I like that idea and I would think it would be wise to go through the
incubator to make sure the codebase is donated "cleanly" to the ASF.
My point was mainly abo
+1
--kevan
On Feb 23, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Donald Woods wrote:
> Given the lack of response on the proposal and the push from our
> champion to get moving :-), I'll assume lazy consensus and call a vote.
>
> I would like to present for a vote the following proposal to be
> sponsored by the Incubat
On Feb 24, 2010, at 8:18 AM, James Carman wrote:
> We already have Apache Commons Validator. Why not just bring this
> code into that project?
Heh. That's been pretty well discussed, already, by both Commons and Incubator.
You can scan the logs for details. The subject was "[PROPOSAL] Validati
We already have Apache Commons Validator. Why not just bring this
code into that project?
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
> As I understand it from the proposal, they intend to be Apache Commons
> Validation.
>
> On 24/02/2010, at 4:19 AM, Nick Kew wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Fe
Nick, are you still -1 because of the name, or will you change your vote
based on Alan's comment that the name could change when it graduates?
My thinking, is that if the project graduates to Commons then it'll
naturally be Commons Validator v2, whereas if it graduates to Geronimo
it would be a Ger
+1 a big one of course!
I communicated with agimatec-validator guys a few times and they needed at
longest 4 hours to respond to my questions and apply my patches :)
This project will be a great add to Apacheland!
LieGrue,
strub
--- Matthias Wessendorf schrieb am Mi, 24.2.2010:
> Von: Matth
+1
(non-binding)
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Martijn Dashorst
wrote:
> +1
>
> Martijn
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apach
+1
Martijn
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
14 matches
Mail list logo
