On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
>> The Incubator has plenty of universal concerns regarding release signing,
>> license headers, distribution, and so on -- which together are more than
>> enough to cover in one document. Adding content specific to N individual
>> programmi
+1.
Good job Amber team. The sigs check out, headers look good with the exception
of the .json files (as expected), LICENSE & NOTICE look like due diligence was
performed.
One note to Simone You need to get your key signed :)
-Matt
>-Original Message-
>From: simone.trip...@gmail.co
On 27 July 2012 17:43, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>-Original Message-
>>From: simone.trip...@gmail.com [mailto:simone.trip...@gmail.com] On
>>Behalf Of Simone Tripodi
>>Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 6:23 AM
>>To: general@incubator.apache.org; elecha...@apache.org
>>Subject: Re: Fwd: [ANN]
>-Original Message-
>From: simone.trip...@gmail.com [mailto:simone.trip...@gmail.com] On
>Behalf Of Simone Tripodi
>Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 6:23 AM
>To: general@incubator.apache.org; elecha...@apache.org
>Subject: Re: Fwd: [ANN] Apache Syncope 1.0.0-RC3-incubating released
>
>Aplogize f
Recent mails have made it obvious that I no longer have the time or
inclination to mentor OpenMeetings. I therefore step down as a mentor.
This project is in pretty good shape. It just made a release. The
community is functional. What it really needs is someone to close off
incubation for them and
Aplogize for joining the discussion late, but
> Here, I would argue that unless we have some written direction about what
> release numbering scheme the incubating should use at The ASF, then
> whatever a project decides to use is fine.
+1
nothing to add :)
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simo
Here, I would argue that unless we have some written direction about
what release numbering scheme the incubating should use at The ASF,
then whatever a project decides to use is fine.
I wish the proposal made my Jukka includes this matter.
Le 7/27/12 11:32 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 27 July 201
On 27 July 2012 08:22, Francesco Chicchiriccò wrote:
> On 27/07/2012 08:13, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
>>
>> Le 7/27/12 1:02 AM, Joe Schaefer a écrit :
>>>
>>> I believe Bill is complaining not about the venue,
>>> but the choice of referring to this package as
>>> a "release candidate" instead of s
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> It sucks for the same old tired rationale behind excluding competent
> peer reviewers from the halls of power here. Some of us think this
> is a core failing of the IPMC, others disagree. If Jukka can satisfy
> the anti-progressives and
>From a mobile device - forgive errors and terseness
On Jul 26, 2012 11:07 PM, "Joe Schaefer" wrote:
>
> >
> > From: Upayavira
> >To: general@incubator.apache.org
> >Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 5:37 PM
> >Subject: Re: Incubator release task force
> >
> >Marvin,
>
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> I'm sure I speak for Marvin when I say I would love to participate on a task
> force dedicated to producing such documentation, but I am also weary about
> writing about a whole bunch of hypotheticals that nobody (other than Roy)
> has a
On 27/07/2012 08:13, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
Le 7/27/12 1:02 AM, Joe Schaefer a écrit :
I believe Bill is complaining not about the venue,
but the choice of referring to this package as
a "release candidate" instead of simply dropping
the "RC" portion of the package name like other
projects typ
12 matches
Mail list logo
