+1 from me (mentor, binding).
St.Ack
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> I would like to call a vote for accepting "Apache Ignite" for Apache
> Incubator.
> The full proposal is available below. We ask the IPMC to sponsor it, with
> cos
> as Champion, and stack, rvs, cos
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> I would like to call a vote for accepting "Apache Ignite" for Apache
> Incubator.
> The full proposal is available below. We ask the IPMC to sponsor it, with cos
> as Champion, and stack, rvs, cos, hsaputra and brane volunteering to be
As an additional reference, here's a previous thread on the topic:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201303.mbox/%3ccapfnckijy6tm5tycfn7msch6h0v_ear7ws5qmftegaoo+do...@mail.gmail.com%3E
Cheers,
Brett
On 26 Sep 2014, at 1:59 pm, Alex Harui wrote:
> In a past discussion
+1 (binding)
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> I would like to call a vote for accepting "Apache Ignite" for Apache
> Incubator.
> The full proposal is available below. We ask the IPMC to sponsor it, with cos
> as Champion, and stack, rvs, cos, hsaputra and brane vol
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> > To the concrete question, the Subversion project never calls a strict
> > [VOTE] for new committers or PMC members. We discuss first, and that sets
> > the direction. People throw out
Hi Devs,
>
>
> >Apache Airavata http://airavata.apache.org/ is a software framework
> >for executing and managing computational jobs and workflows on
> >distributed computing resources. Taverna's concern is not as much job
> >coordination, but more of a data flow between services. Airavata's
> >
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> To the concrete question, the Subversion project never calls a strict
> [VOTE] for new committers or PMC members. We discuss first, and that sets
> the direction. People throw out +1 messages, but that is "sure, make it so"
> rather than a true
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>...
> Specifically, we (CouchDB) see voting as the failure mode of a
> discussion (a useful one non-the-less), or as a last-step requirement
> to officiate a particular set of project-level decisions (that are
> fully enumerated in the bylaws)
Thanks, see comments below
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 1:11 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 28 September 2014 22:31, Hendrik Dev wrote:
>> So the project passed with 6 +1 votes (at least 3 of them binding from
>> Romain Manni-Bucau, Justin Mclean and Daniel Kulp) and no -1 votes.
>> See http://markmail.org/thr
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:52 AM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wrote:
> ...The HTTP Server project has successfully operated by unanimity...
As a side note, I often tell people that IMO the HTTP Server is so
modular because people couldn't agree on things - it's much easier to
get consensus and sometimes
10 matches
Mail list logo