Dear Incubator
I summarize the vote for releasing of Apache Tamaya version '
0.1-incubating':
+1 John D. Ament
+1 Romain ;ammi-Bucau
+1 Justin Mclean
So we have three +1 and no -1 votes, so the vote PASSED successfully.
We will continue with our work for releasing, thanks everybody.
J Anatole
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We could define a hierarchy of right to use the mark: pmc has ultimate
> right, if the pmc are not producing a packaging for that system then the
> developers of the packaging system have the right to def
Thank you Marvin.
-Gour
On 8/19/15, 9:20 AM, "Marvin Humphrey" wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Gour Saha wrote:
>> Please grant me write access to the incubator wiki.
>>
>> My username is GourSaha.
>>
>> I am an Apache Slider committer.
>
>Done.
>
>Marvin Humphrey
>
>-
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Gour Saha wrote:
> Please grant me write access to the incubator wiki.
>
> My username is GourSaha.
>
> I am an Apache Slider committer.
Done.
Marvin Humphrey
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-u
Please grant me write access to the incubator wiki.
My username is GourSaha.
I am an Apache Slider committer.
-Gour
A side matter that has not been raised here.
One reason for protecting a mark is to avoid losing it.
I have worked at two corporations that were necessarily aggressive in
protecting the use of their marks: Univac in various incarnations and Xerox
Corporation.
While Google might be happy to see
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 19, 2015, at 1:46, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
>
> Well I actually have concerns about the "maven" that debian is publishing.
> There are some quite significant - in my view - deviations from our Maven
Can you be specific? Should you perhaps take this up with the mav
There is a reason that these distributions are not called hadoop in the product
name. There is no cloudera hadoop. Nor MapR hadoop.
It is a fine line to acknowledge provenance and give proper credit but not
claim to be identical.
On the other hand, hive and pig and zookeeper in the distrib
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> ...Well I actually have concerns about the "maven" that debian is publishing.
> There are some quite significant - in my view - deviations from our Maven.
>
> For me, the majority of the concerns could be addressed if they fix the
> *Desc
Am 18.08.2015 18:46, schrieb Marvin Humphrey:
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 2:02 AM, Kalle Korhonen
So what if a project (members) does not vote but unofficially
releases binary executable packages, perhaps along with source to some
other location than /dist/? Clearly, it's not an official release by
We could define a hierarchy of right to use the mark: pmc has ultimate
right, if the pmc are not producing a packaging for that system then the
developers of the packaging system have the right to define who can use the
mark in relation to their packaging system only.
The aim here would be to make
I might add also that our integration tests should pass for patched
releases (if you want to call the package "maven")
Let's take this straw man out for a walk:
Microsoft produce a maven.msi and it is available for download on a page
called "how to get maven" on the Microsoft website. The install
Perhaps, the maven pmc could decree: if you are making a convenience
installer of maven for an OS where the maven pmc does not create a
convenience installer, you may use "maven" as the packaging name provided
the description clarifies it is a custom build and provides an ack of our
marks. Also the
On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 at 02:47 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:40 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Yes that was my analysis of the question: If I decide to produce an
> > unofficial binary release of Maven without the approval of the rest
I was indeed talking of publishing the original material, released properly
from Apache but with some minor changes to fit into the "Steve&Nick
Platform" (whatever that might be). I think that is analogous...
So, if we agree that is all the same... minor alterations of official
releases
That
15 matches
Mail list logo
