Multiple threads would be welcome.
Ralph
On Jun 1, 2011, at 10:25 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
> Dumb question. Are we obligated to converse like this, in a single email
> thread, for the duration of the proposal review process? Is this an
> organizing principle? Would I break anything
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Edward J. Yoon resolved INCUBATOR-114.
--
Resolution: Fixed
This issue is fixed. Thanks!
> Broken link in Apache Incubator we
Dumb question. Are we obligated to converse like this, in a single email
thread, for the duration of the proposal review process? Is this an
organizing principle? Would I break anything if I created threads,
perhaps prefixed in a consistent way, like "OpenOffice Proposal: Topic
Foo"?
-Rob
On 2011-06-02, at 01:02 , robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
> Louis Suarez-Potts wrote on 06/01/2011 09:41:08
> PM:
>
>>
>> * Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
>> * We at OOo receive lots of requests to use it for mostly good
>> purposes. We grant these, with minimal fuss and have set
Louis Suarez-Potts wrote on 06/01/2011 09:41:08
PM:
>
> * Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
> * We at OOo receive lots of requests to use it for mostly good
> purposes. We grant these, with minimal fuss and have set up systems
> to do that more efficiently. With the change in trade
Ross Gardler wrote on 06/01/2011 06:03:09 PM:
> >>
> >> There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why
> >> only two for such a large codebase?
> >>
> >
> > We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list,
developers
> > familiar with the code base via their
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 22:52, wrote:
>...
> What am I missing here?
>
> According to the Incubation Policy [1]:
>
> "A Sponsor SHALL be either:
>
> * the Board of the Apache Software Foundation;
> * a Top Level Project (TLP) within the Apache Software Foundation
> (where the TLP considers t
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 21:41, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
>
> On 2011-06-01, at 20:18 , Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>> [cc'ing Italo and Louis hopefully they have joined the incubator list
>> already, but just in case]
>
> Thanks. I actually have already joined it.
> So, to the list: Wave of hand signify
"William A. Rowe Jr." wrote on 06/01/2011 03:01:50
PM:
>
> What is a more serious question, how many bug fixes would go into
> LibreOffice without being offered to the ASF under the AL? LO has no
> copyright assignment, so the principals of LO don't have the flexibility
> to offer these to the
On 6/1/2011 1:24 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote on 06/01/2011 12:21:23 PM:
>
>> There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why
>> only two for such a large codebase?
>
> We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list, developers
>
+1 based on successfully starting a Cassandra cluster on EC2.
/Johan
On 30 maj 2011, at 22.23, Tom White wrote:
> Please vote on the following release candidate for Apache Whirr,
> version 0.5.0-incubating. We already received two binding IPMC +1
> votes for the PPMC release vote on whirr-dev.
>
Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 06/01/2011 02:56:10
PM:
>
> > We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list,
developers
> > familiar with the code base via their work on Lotus Symphony (which is
our
> > OpenOffice based project). But then we could have been criticized for
the
> >
sa3r...@gmail.com wrote on 06/01/2011 10:36:39 PM:
> > Hi all -
> >
> > I see that I'm listed as a sponsor. Can you please remove my name
> and replace with someone else? I never agreed to sponsor this.
>
> I've removed your name.
>
What am I missing here?
According to the Incubation Policy
Alexei Fedotov wrote on 06/01/2011 01:38:43 PM:
>
> OpenOffice is used in our product [1] we want to submit to the
> incubator. We promised to show that we can gradually clean up LGPL
> from the code and were working on that [2]. We'd have one less
> head-ache with OO under Apache License (even
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 9:25 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> Hi all -
>
> I see that I'm listed as a sponsor. Can you please remove my name and
> replace with someone else? I never agreed to sponsor this.
I've removed your name.
- Sam Ruby
-
Ross Gardler wrote on 06/01/2011 12:52:46 PM:
>
> I think it would be really good to have this goal in the proposal
> itself, it is something concrete to point to from a community
> development point of view.
>
Thanks, Ross. I've updated the "community" section of the proposal on the
wiki
On 2011-06-01, at 20:18 , Ross Gardler wrote:
> [cc'ing Italo and Louis hopefully they have joined the incubator list
> already, but just in case]
Thanks. I actually have already joined it.
So, to the list: Wave of hand signifying hello!
And, again, delighted this is moving ahead transparent
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> We've reached out to the OO and LO communities, and have
> the call out to all current OO/LO developers to join up
> if they want...
+1
- Sam Ruby
-
To unsubscribe, e-mai
[cc'ing Italo and Louis hopefully they have joined the incubator list
already, but just in case]
On 02/06/2011 01:01, Jim Jagielski wrote:
More info re TDF and LOo
- Forwarded message from Italo
Vignoli -
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 23:16:53 +0200
From: Italo Vignoli
Reply-To: italo.vign.
More info re TDF and LOo
- Forwarded message from Italo Vignoli
-
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 23:16:53 +0200
From: Italo Vignoli
Reply-To: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
To: Jim Jagielski
CC: Louis Suarez-Potts ,
Sam Ruby
Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
On 6/1/11 8:35 PM
Ease up... people just lost the "to me" in your message. And others
didn't see it in the quoted sections.
It happens
Cheers,
-g
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 18:31, dsh wrote:
> Again,
>
> "to me" means to me as in it's my personal opinion and nothing else.
> How could I be somebody defining the r
Again,
"to me" means to me as in it's my personal opinion and nothing else.
How could I be somebody defining the rules? I suspect the rules are
all documented anyway. So you did the interpretation of an opinion
expressed by somebody else and of course if you treat that opinion as
a requirement or
On 01/06/2011 22:26, Greg Stein wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 17:20, Benson Margulies wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 01/06/2011 19:51, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
dshwrote on 06/01/2011 02:16:58 PM:
...
And is it generally held to be a criterion
for
On 01/06/2011 19:24, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote on 06/01/2011 12:21:23 PM:
There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why
only two for such a large codebase?
We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list, developers
familiar wit
Guys,
"to me" means to me as in it's my personal opinion and nothing else.
And that opinion of course still stands unchanged. I never wrote
anything about requirements especially not in a sense of formal
requirements.
Cheers
Daniel
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Greg
Greg,
I'm happy to see more people throw tomatoes at the 'distro
requirement'. At the quote depth at the time, I though I was just
joining Ross in challenging that supposed requirement.
--benson
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:26 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 17:20, Benson Margulies
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 17:20, Benson Margulies wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> On 01/06/2011 19:51, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>>>
>>> dsh wrote on 06/01/2011 02:16:58 PM:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> And is it generally held to be a criterion
>>> for a podling to graduate
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 01/06/2011 19:51, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>>
>> dsh wrote on 06/01/2011 02:16:58 PM:
>
> ...
>
>> And is it generally held to be a criterion
>> for a podling to graduate or even initiate, that it first persuade all
>> Linux distros to
On 01/06/2011 19:51, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
dsh wrote on 06/01/2011 02:16:58 PM:
...
And is it generally held to be a criterion
for a podling to graduate or even initiate, that it first persuade all
Linux distros to include it
We don't care where it is used or how it is used. What w
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Eric Sammer wrote:
>> Incubators:
>>
>> I can't find an appropriate policy on the licensing requirements of
>> ancillary files like BUILD or CHANGES files that are commonly distributed
>> with releases.
On Jun 1, 2011, at 3:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 15:04, eric b wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> First, apologies for the new thread, due to my late arrival on this list.
>>
>> As developer for OpenOffice.org since 2005, and having some knowledge in OOo
>> source code, I'm interested t
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 15:04, eric b wrote:
> Hi,
>
> First, apologies for the new thread, due to my late arrival on this list.
>
> As developer for OpenOffice.org since 2005, and having some knowledge in OOo
> source code, I'm interested to contribute to the new OpenOffice.org (as
> dev).
>
> Whe
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 14:56, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 8:24 PM, wrote:
>
>> We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list, developers
>> familiar with the code base via their work on Lotus Symphony (which is our
>> OpenOffice based project). But then we c
FYI:
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Louis Suarez-Potts
> Date: June 1, 2011 2:58:02 PM EDT
> To: Jim Jagielski
> Cc: Louis Suarez-Potts , Italo Vignoli
> , Sam Ruby
> Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
> message-id:
>
> For me, yes, share. And I quite agree that more is better and transp
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jim Jagielski
> Date: June 1, 2011 2:33:15 PM EDT
> To: Louis Suarez-Potts
> Cc: Italo Vignoli , Sam Ruby
>
> Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
> message-id:
>
>
> On Jun 1, 2011, at 2:18 PM, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't have (yet) an agen
Hi,
First, apologies for the new thread, due to my late arrival on this
list.
As developer for OpenOffice.org since 2005, and having some knowledge
in OOo source code, I'm interested to contribute to the new
OpenOffice.org (as dev).
Where are the essential links to start ? e.g. I create
On 6/1/2011 1:16 PM, dsh wrote:
> To me the proof point whether this proposal will be successful or not
> is whether Linux distributions having already dropped support for
> OpenOffice and switched to LibreOffice instead would be willing to
> reverse that decision and move back to OpenOffice again
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 8:24 PM, wrote:
> We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list, developers
> familiar with the code base via their work on Lotus Symphony (which is our
> OpenOffice based project). But then we could have been criticized for the
> proposal being too domin
dsh wrote on 06/01/2011 02:16:58 PM:
>
> To me the proof point whether this proposal will be successful or not
> is whether Linux distributions having already dropped support for
> OpenOffice and switched to LibreOffice instead would be willing to
> reverse that decision and move back to OpenOff
Ross Gardler wrote on 06/01/2011 12:21:23 PM:
>
> There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why
> only two for such a large codebase?
>
We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list, developers
familiar with the code base via their work on Lotus Symph
Nick Burch wrote on 06/01/2011 01:48:49 PM:
>
> Speaking personally, I would be interested in seeing how ODF Toolkit
could
> fit within the POI project. We already have a number of components, and
> interfaces that try to smooth over the differences between the different
> formats underneat
To me the proof point whether this proposal will be successful or not
is whether Linux distributions having already dropped support for
OpenOffice and switched to LibreOffice instead would be willing to
reverse that decision and move back to OpenOffice again now that it is
in a process to be propos
On 6/1/2011 12:48 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
>
> This would possibly warrant a seperate discussion though, especially if the
> codebase were
> to be destined for POI rather than a new TLP.
And note, this is a decision that can be made *during* incubation,
with POI folks participating on the incubatin
I view this proposal very critical. IMO, OpenOffice@Apache would be a dead end:
- There is an existing community over at LibreOffice. So what good
does it, to build a second community here?
- The afore mentioned community was built exactly, because the
initiators of the current proposal have been
On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, Luke Kowalski wrote:
The following project is being sent in as an incubator candidate.
As there are likely quite a few people new to Apache interested in and
coming with this proposal, I thought I should send a quick note pointing
out some community releated resources and
On Jun 1, 2011, at 1:13 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> For sure, we need to add people. I expect that we will get
> quite a bunch interested. After all, this was all kept
> hush-hush. Now that the cat is out of the bag, we will for
> sure see that list grow.
>
FWIW, I have contacted the 2 main pe
On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
That would be great. There is also another project (or set of projects)
that IBM and Sun/Oracle have worked on over the past few years, called the
:ODF Toolkit". For example, this component was just released today:
http://odftoolkit.org/projects
OpenOffice is used in our product [1] we want to submit to the
incubator. We promised to show that we can gradually clean up LGPL
from the code and were working on that [2]. We'd have one less
head-ache with OO under Apache License (even if we don't statically
linking it, GPL does not define linkin
On Jun 1, 2011, at 12:41 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 01/06/2011 17:28, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 1, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There is a statement that "Oracle will assist in the transition and
>>> migration from OpenOffice.org.", I am probably reading too muc
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
> We're working on it (River, that is)!
I know, and (having been one of the key mentors) I couldn't be happier
about that!
What I'm trying to bring up are lessons learned from the troubles that
River had to go through. Let's make sure OpenO
Sorry :D
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
> wrote:
>> Here you are ;) [1].
>>
>> [1] - http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal
>
> hey I was just about to enter it - my phone prevented me to submit.
>
>
We're working on it (River, that is)!
Cheers,
Greg.
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 12:49, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> > On Jun 1, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> >> There is a statement that "Oracle will assist in the transition and
>> Hopefully more will show up. As with other podlings, we're usually
>> quite liberal with adding people onto the "Initial Committers" list.
>
> I see, so the community development starts now. Good. I hope we see plenty
> of LibreOffice people stepping up to be named. If they do step up will they
On 6/1/2011 11:33 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>
> That would be great. There is also another project (or set of projects)
> that IBM and Sun/Oracle have worked on over the past few years, called the
> :ODF Toolkit". For example, this component was just released today:
> http://odftoolk
On 01/06/2011 17:33, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Jukka Zitting wrote on 06/01/2011 12:13:09 PM:
Community
OpenOffice.org. seeks to further encourage developer and user
communities
during incubation, beyond the existing developers currently working on
the
project.
Any thoughts on
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
wrote:
> Here you are ;) [1].
>
> [1] - http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal
hey I was just about to enter it - my phone prevented me to submit.
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at
On 06/01/2011 11:45 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 01/06/2011 17:29, Greg Stein wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:21, Ross Gardler wrote:
Thanks for this exciting proposal. I have a few questions.
There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why
only
two for such a large codeba
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:34, Luke Kowalski wrote:
> we were instructed to send the proposal to an email address.
> Should we go and hack at the wiki now? No issues, either way.
Thanks for the offer, but we're all good. The proposal came through just fine.
Cheers,
-g
---
Thanks a lot Arvind
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:43 PM, arv...@cloudera.com wrote:
> Hi Mohammad,
>
> Thanks for your offer to step in as a mentor. I have added you to the list
> of nominated mentors on the proposal.
>
> Thanks and Regards,
> Arvind Prabhakar
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Moham
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> On Jun 1, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> There is a statement that "Oracle will assist in the transition and migration
>> from OpenOffice.org.", I am probably reading too much into it, but why is
>> there not a statement that O
Here you are ;) [1].
[1] - http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:12, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
don't know if OpenOffice is an exception, but usually Proposals are done
>>> here:
http://wiki.ap
On 01/06/2011 17:29, Greg Stein wrote:
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:21, Ross Gardler wrote:
Thanks for this exciting proposal. I have a few questions.
There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why only
two for such a large codebase?
Hopefully more will show up. As with o
Hi Mohammad,
Thanks for your offer to step in as a mentor. I have added you to the list
of nominated mentors on the proposal.
Thanks and Regards,
Arvind Prabhakar
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
nour.moham...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on the proposal
>
> Sound like a very go
On 01/06/2011 17:28, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jun 1, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
There is a statement that "Oracle will assist in the transition and migration from
OpenOffice.org.", I am probably reading too much into it, but why is there not a
statement that Oracle intend to cont
Jukka Zitting wrote on 06/01/2011 12:13:09 PM:
>
> > Community
> >
> > OpenOffice.org. seeks to further encourage developer and user
communities
> > during incubation, beyond the existing developers currently working on
the
> > project.
>
> Any thoughts on how (or if) the LibreOffice commun
> There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why only
> two for such a large codebase?
>
Not only is it a very large code base, it was a weakly maintained and
documented code base for quite some time before the
Sun->Oracle->LO-Split/Splat process.
We generally expect Apache
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:21, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Thanks for this exciting proposal. I have a few questions.
>
> There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why only
> two for such a large codebase?
Hopefully more will show up. As with other podlings, we're usually
quite l
On Jun 1, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>
> There is a statement that "Oracle will assist in the transition and migration
> from OpenOffice.org.", I am probably reading too much into it, but why is
> there not a statement that Oracle intend to continue development once the
> transiti
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:12, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>>> don't know if OpenOffice is an exception, but usually Proposals are done
>> here:
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/
>>
>> There is no requirement to use the Wiki. I've attached the text of the .ODT
>> file in the message below.
>
> T
Thanks for this exciting proposal. I have a few questions.
There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why
only two for such a large codebase?
It's going to be very hard for two committers to manage and maintain
this code.
The proposal states "Both Oracle and ASF agree
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> OpenOffice.org will be contributed to Apache Software Foundation by Oracle
> Corporation in compliance with ASF licensing and governance.
Nice!
> Community
>
> OpenOffice.org. seeks to further encourage developer and user communities
> d
>> don't know if OpenOffice is an exception, but usually Proposals are done
> here:
>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/
>
> There is no requirement to use the Wiki. I've attached the text of the .ODT
> file in the message below.
Thanks Greg.
...but it helps developing the proposal. Guess we can
Oops, the attachment was opened with LibreOffice here. Sorry, can't resist.
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Luke Kowalski wrote:
> The following project is being sent in as an incubator candidate.
>
> regards
> luke
>
>
>
> -
> T
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:57, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
> Hello Luke,
>
> don't know if OpenOffice is an exception, but usually Proposals are done
here:
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/
There is no requirement to use the Wiki. I've attached the text of the .ODT
file in the message below.
Abs
Hello Luke,
don't know if OpenOffice is an exception, but usually Proposals are done here:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/
Best regards,
Christian
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Luke Kowalski wrote:
> The following project is being sent in as an incubator candidate.
>
> regards
> luke
>
>
>
The following project is being sent in as an incubator candidate.
regards
luke
Apache OpenOffice.org proposal_june12011.odt
Description: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@in
+1 on the proposal
Sound like a very good and project. Also I am interested to be a
mentor if you would like to have another one and if thats possible :).
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Phillip Rhodes
wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 2:40 PM, arv...@cloudera.com
> wrote:
>
>> Greetings All,
>
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Eric Sammer wrote:
> Incubators:
>
> I can't find an appropriate policy on the licensing requirements of
> ancillary files like BUILD or CHANGES files that are commonly distributed
> with releases. I'm specifically looking at the somewhat vague and confusing
> http:
Cool, nice to see this project.
+1 (non-binding)
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Jonathan Hsieh wrote:
> Howdy!
>
> I would like to propose Flume to be an Apache Incubator project. Flume is a
> distributed, reliable, and available system for efficiently collecting,
> aggregating, and moving l
Then, this vote passes as follows:
+1 Stefan Seelmann*
+1 Eric Charles
+1 Tommaso Teofili*
+1 Steve Loughran*
Thanks for voting! I'll push the release out.
Thanks.
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:03 AM, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think you already have a 3rd binding vote from Steve Lough
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13042064#comment-13042064
]
Mohammad Nour commented on INCUBATOR-114:
-
Thank you sir :)
> Broken link in A
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13042058#comment-13042058
]
Edward J. Yoon commented on INCUBATOR-114:
--
yes sir.
> Broken link in Apache
Yeah I know :), but I thought we will see more info. when signed in
:D. Stupid me :P.
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
> wrote:
>> ... There is no sign-up for this service, it only shows sign-in. Also I
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13042051#comment-13042051
]
Mohammad Nour commented on INCUBATOR-114:
-
- Fixed.
- But I don't have any priv
The 72 hours lazy consensus for the IPMC are up and we did get one
more +1 from Mohammad Nour El-Din** and no other votes.
The vote is successful and approved. I will make the artifacts available asap.
regards,
Karl
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Karl Pauls wrote:
> Time to call the vote on
I am going to fix it now
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Edward J. Yoon (JIRA) wrote:
>
> [
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13042045#comment-13042045
> ]
>
> Edward J. Yoon commented
Well I guess they are related to each other after all, but IMHO there
is a very slight difference between them. AFAIU the PRC regulations
that they are afraid of any misleading publicity or obligations that
might outcome from incorrect publicity activity more specifically if
this kind of publicity
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13042045#comment-13042045
]
Edward J. Yoon commented on INCUBATOR-114:
--
oh, it's a release#maven part :
h
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13042042#comment-13042042
]
Upayavira commented on INCUBATOR-114:
-
you don't say on which page this link appear
Also, distinguish between 'press' activity and just trying to get more
devs on board.
You need to tell people about your project if you want it to grow, but
that is a different business to seeking 'publicity'.
Make sense?
Upayavira
On Tue, 31 May 2011 18:13 -0700, "Joe Schaefer"
wrote:
>
>
>
Hi,
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
wrote:
> ... There is no sign-up for this service, it only shows sign-in. Also I
> can see that you can sign-in with your google account. But is it
> configured to sign-in with our Apache account ?...
http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos
Broken link in Apache Incubator webpage
---
Key: INCUBATOR-114
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-114
Project: Incubator
Issue Type: Bug
Components: site
Reporter: E
92 matches
Mail list logo
