+1
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Luciano Resende wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:45 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> after the discussion so far [1], I'd like to put Detlacloud for a vote
>> for acceptance into the Apache Incubator according to the proposal[2]
>>
>> I _think_
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:45 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> after the discussion so far [1], I'd like to put Detlacloud for a vote
> for acceptance into the Apache Incubator according to the proposal[2]
>
> I _think_ I've added everybody who expressed interest in being a mentor
> or ini
+1
Craig
On May 12, 2010, at 5:45 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
Hi all,
after the discussion so far [1], I'd like to put Detlacloud for a vote
for acceptance into the Apache Incubator according to the proposal[2]
I _think_ I've added everybody who expressed interest in being a
mentor
or ini
On 05/12/2010 08:45 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
Hi all,
after the discussion so far [1], I'd like to put Detlacloud for a vote
for acceptance into the Apache Incubator according to the proposal[2]
I _think_ I've added everybody who expressed interest in being a mentor
or initial committer to th
Hi all,
after the discussion so far [1], I'd like to put Detlacloud for a vote
for acceptance into the Apache Incubator according to the proposal[2]
I _think_ I've added everybody who expressed interest in being a mentor
or initial committer to the proposal - if I have forgotten anybody,
please h
Luciano Resende wrote:
On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 12:41 PM, David Lutterkort wrote:
Hi,
I would like to propose the Deltacloud API[1] for addition to the Apache
incubator.
I have added the initial proposal to the Wiki[2]; it is also included
below for convenience.
There are a few additional peo
Fair point Craig ... my head was more around grouping like you had with the
various DB projects. Each one was independent but kind of under the DB
umbrella, right ? I didn't mean to imply one PMC to rule them all ... bad idea.
On May 12, 2010, at 3:16 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
> For me, not
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Craig L Russell
wrote:
> For me, not so much.
>
> A TLP owns a code base and is responsible for it. While I appreciate the
> sentiment, I don't think it's wise to require that different communities
> with nothing else in common except "cloud" in their name have to
For me, not so much.
A TLP owns a code base and is responsible for it. While I appreciate
the sentiment, I don't think it's wise to require that different
communities with nothing else in common except "cloud" in their name
have to be managed by the same PMC.
How is "cloud" different from
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Raymond Feng wrote:
> > +1. Some existing Apache projects such as Tuscany also have interests in
> this space.
> >
>
> +1 For Paul's suggestion and Raymond's remakrs.
>
+1. Indeed it makes a lot of sense
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Raymond Feng wrote:
> +1. Some existing Apache projects such as Tuscany also have interests in this
> space.
>
+1 For Paul's suggestion and Raymond's remakrs.
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresend
+1. Some existing Apache projects such as Tuscany also have interests in this
space.
Thanks,
Raymond
Raymond Feng
rf...@apache.org
Apache Tuscany PMC member and committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of Tuscany SCA In Action book
On 5/12/10 10:29 AM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
thinking about this a little I think a TLP that grouped the Cloud technologies
together make a lot of sense. With LibCloud, DeltaCloud, Whirr, etc. as a
start there will clearly be some additional projects coming.
+1. I think it'll be easier too
thinking about this a little I think a TLP that grouped the Cloud technologies
together make a lot of sense. With LibCloud, DeltaCloud, Whirr, etc. as a
start there will clearly be some additional projects coming.
On May 6, 2010, at 3:54 PM, Paul Querna wrote:
> I think it does raise the quest
On 11/05/2010, Mike Rheinheimer wrote:
> Thanks Sebb,
>
> Just to be clear, is this a minus 1 vote from you? If so, I'll roll it all
> back and restart the process.
The missing AL headers would have been -1 from me, but as they cannot
currently be fixed that can be left for a later release (if
Thanks Sebb,
Just to be clear, is this a minus 1 vote from you? If so, I'll roll it all
back and restart the process.
mike
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 11:36 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 11/05/2010, Mike Rheinheimer wrote:
> > IPMCers,
> >
> > Wink 1.1 release voting has completed successfully on the w
16 matches
Mail list logo
