The following votes were received:
IPMC:
+1 Niclas
+1 Brett
+1 Gav
+1 Wendy
+1 Luciano
+1 Craig
+1 Davanum
The following additional votes were received:
+1 Mark (ASF Member)
+1 Dennis (ASF Member, proposed mentor)
The vote has passed. I'll start by getting the mailing lists set
> -Original Message-
> From: cctriel...@apache.org [mailto:cctriel...@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, 13 August 2010 6:05 AM
> To: public-comm...@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: svn commit: r984937 - /incubator/public/trunk/site-
> publish/deltacloud/
>
> Author: cctrieloff
> Date: Thu Aug 1
Fair enough :)
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 12, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Craig L Russell
wrote:
Hi Dims,
On Aug 12, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Craig,
in my mind, it's not the number of steps that we eliminate, it's the
message that we send. Instead of saying you all are *under*
+1
-- dims
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 12, 2010, at 2:32 PM, Craig L Russell
wrote:
+1
Craig
On Aug 6, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
Hi,
We have finalised the proposal with the additional committer and it
has now been posted for a couple of weeks, so I'd like to put it to
Hi Dims,
On Aug 12, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Craig,
in my mind, it's not the number of steps that we eliminate, it's the
message that we send. Instead of saying you all are *under* the
microscope, we say that real quickly a few of you will become part of
the microscope and lo
Craig,
in my mind, it's not the number of steps that we eliminate, it's the
message that we send. Instead of saying you all are *under* the
microscope, we say that real quickly a few of you will become part of
the microscope and look in on not just yours but also other
podlings...my 2 cents.
than
+1
Craig
On Aug 6, 2010, at 8:21 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
Hi,
We have finalised the proposal with the additional committer and it
has now been posted for a couple of weeks, so I'd like to put it to
a vote.
With the weekend included, I'll tally the votes after 5 days (120
hours).
Than
- Original Message
> From: Craig L Russell
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, August 12, 2010 2:21:44 PM
> Subject: Re: an experiment
>
>
> On Aug 11, 2010, at 10:45 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>
> > The first idea should be fairly straightforward: that for
> > the projects
On Aug 11, 2010, at 10:45 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
The first idea should be fairly straightforward: that for
the projects I participate in (so far thrift and sis), that
the IPMC delegates to the PPMC the decision-making process
for voting in new committers: basically rolling back the clock
to Ma
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have finalised the proposal with the additional committer and it has now
> been posted for a couple of weeks, so I'd like to put it to a vote.
>
> With the weekend included, I'll tally the votes after 5 days (120 hours).
>
> Thanks,
- Original Message
> From: Niclas Hedhman
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, August 12, 2010 1:13:41 AM
> Subject: Re: an experiment
> Yes, definitely more controversial. Pros would include greater
> exposure to the Incubator noise, learning from others, becoming part
> o
- Original Message
> From: Stefan Bodewig
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, August 12, 2010 12:43:59 AM
> Subject: Re: an experiment
> There isn't anything that would stop a mentor from proposing a podling
> committer who is not an ASF member as an IPMC member today, is
On 2010-08-12 02:31, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>
> On 07/08/2010, at 1:21 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have finalised the proposal with the additional committer and it has now
>> been posted for a couple of weeks, so I'd like to put it to a vote.
>>
>> With the weekend included, I'll t
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> The first idea should be fairly straightforward: that for
> the projects I participate in (so far thrift and sis), that
> the IPMC delegates to the PPMC the decision-making process
> for voting in new committers: basically rolling back the cl
Hi Niall,
On 8/12/10 2:52 AM, "Niall Pemberton" wrote:
> Clearly then there are small TLPs that operate effectively. However
> any TLP that can't get 3 PMC votes is effectively dead and I don't
> want to see RAT end up in that situation in a year or two. Seeing only
> 3 votes on the RAT 0.7 rele
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) <
> chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> I feel kind of the opposite -- RAT is an important tool that's required of
>> all the Incubator projects, but pretty widely integra
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:12, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On 2010-08-11, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>>
>>> The real point though is not size - its *activity*.
>>
>> [absolutely correct observation of low activity snipped]
>>
>>> My concern is if RAT
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Ant,
>
> My personal opinion (and i am hoping!) was that such individuals from ppmc's
> who end up in ipmc would help build bridges between podlings and will help
> get lessons learned (when any ppmc has issues/problems/roadblocks) back t
+1
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message
> From: Brett Porter
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Thu, August 12, 2010 2:31:25 AM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] NPanday to enter the incubator
>
>
>
> On 07/08/2010, at 1:21 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We have finalised th
Big +1 to all Greg's comments below. Let's just try it - I don't see a huge
effort/loss ratio - I think we'd all be surprised at how well folks are at
responding to requests if we just ask them to.
Cheers,
Chris
On 8/11/10 10:15 PM, "Greg Stein" wrote:
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 19:24, Joe Sc
20 matches
Mail list logo
