Thanks Brett, I kept meaning to separate the maven project parts from
the common ones, and this is a good start.
--Brian (mobile)
On Nov 13, 2009, at 2:29 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
For unrelated reasons, I today split out the Apache-ness part of the
Maven release process (still syncing):
h
On Nov 11, 2009, at 5:35 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Dan,
>
> "It's up to each project to get their releases correct" - Yes. But not
> everyone hangs out on the d...@maven or gene...@incubator. Hence the request
> to broadcast.
>
> I really don't understand the "why?" - No one is trying to
For unrelated reasons, I today split out the Apache-ness part of the Maven
release process (still syncing):
http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html
It could still use more work, but that's all I have time for right now if
someone wants to patch it (eg, to explain the paren
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:18, Niall Pemberton
wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> The Apache Incubator is about EDUCATION. It is about TEACHING podlings
>> how to work here at Apache.
>>
>> It is not about making podlings thoughtlessly follow checklists.
>>
>> It is abo
> Why not sent it through bo...@? All Chairs are subscribed to that
> list, several board members have in the past raised concerns about the
> releases created using maven. This would unequivocally show that maven
> has delivered a working solution, and notify all PMC chairs of the
> general Apache
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:43 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> Actually, the vote was kind of withdrawn to update it to new descriptors.
> Thus, its not available yet. In anycase, no need to spam all the PMCs,
> especially those not using Maven. Just keep an eye on the annou...@maven
> list. When av
On Nov 11, 2009, at 7:27 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 20:48, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>
>> Is this topic really appropriate for incubator general? I'm having trouble
>> following along with all the noise.
>
> At the root, it is a discussion about LGPL dependencies in an incoming
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 20:48, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> Is this topic really appropriate for incubator general? I'm having trouble
> following along with all the noise.
At the root, it is a discussion about LGPL dependencies in an incoming podling.
Neon is LGPL. Serf is ALv2. Both are optional, t
Is this topic really appropriate for incubator general? I'm having trouble
following along with all the noise.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incub
Thanks Brian!
On 11/11/2009 06:22 PM, Brian Fox wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
I think this is a pretty important issue worth "spamming" but whatever
I think it's worth noting, I've had several projects asking for it to
be available so they can use it and di
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> I think this is a pretty important issue worth "spamming" but whatever
>
I think it's worth noting, I've had several projects asking for it to
be available so they can use it and ditch their homebrew solutions.
When it's promoted to the r
I think this is a pretty important issue worth "spamming" but whatever
-- dims
On 11/11/2009 05:43 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Actually, the vote was kind of withdrawn to update it to new descriptors.
Thus, its not available yet. In anycase, no need to spam all the PMCs,
especially those not usin
Actually, the vote was kind of withdrawn to update it to new descriptors.
Thus, its not available yet. In anycase, no need to spam all the PMCs,
especially those not using Maven. Just keep an eye on the annou...@maven
list. When available, it will be announced there.
Dan
On Wed Nove
Dan,
"It's up to each project to get their releases correct" - Yes. But not everyone hangs out on the d...@maven or
gene...@incubator. Hence the request to broadcast.
I really don't understand the "why?" - No one is trying to mandate using a specific pom across all PMC(s). Just the fact
that
On Wed November 11 2009 4:52:23 pm Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Brian,
>
> Do you mind sending an email to pmcs AT apache.org to inform them that they
> should be using this new version of Apache pom? And any other additional
> instructions needed to enable this "feature" to work.
Why? It's up t
Brian,
Do you mind sending an email to pmcs AT apache.org to inform them that they should be using this new version of Apache
pom? And any other additional instructions needed to enable this "feature" to work.
thanks,
dims
On 11/11/2009 03:51 PM, Brian Fox wrote:
What is happening in some Ja
> What is happening in some Java projects, via Maven's release plugin,
> is disturbing since the "source release" only exist in the subversion
> repository
This problem has been solved and is no longer valid. Any
repetition of the old news is total fud. We have for many months now
been providing p
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 07:06, Niall Pemberton
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>...
>> It already has the Apache License (v2), and it uses a NOTICE file (per
>> the license), and our packaging is tighter/stronger than typical
>> Apache releases (per Justin's note). Are
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Igor Burilo
> wrote:
>> isn’t guaranteed (you and Michael Pilato are sceptic regarding Serf). Nobody
>
> Hang on - let's be clear here: ra_serf passes *all* of the Subversion
> regression tests just fine and has done so for several yea
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Igor Burilo wrote:
> Mark Phippard-3 wrote:
>>
>>>I gave counsel to the Eclipse Foundation and explained that they could
>>>provide a fully functioning JavaHL library to users with only EPL
>>>compatible code. Basically, you just need to build without Neon, BDB
>
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Igor Burilo wrote:
> isn’t guaranteed (you and Michael Pilato are sceptic regarding Serf). Nobody
Hang on - let's be clear here: ra_serf passes *all* of the Subversion
regression tests just fine and has done so for several years now. (An
ra_serf slave is part of
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 14:21, Craig L Russell wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 6, 2009, at 10:43 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>>> But with all that said, how about we do this: we'll do a 1.6.7 release
>>> from the 1.6.x branch after we do the code import. That r
to use SVN client, which is “different” and migh have problems.
In the second case, SVN should work without DAV protocol, which isn’t
acceptable by majority of people.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/-PROPOSAL--VOTE--Subversion-tp26203843p26299895.html
Sent from the Apache
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> The Apache Incubator is about EDUCATION. It is about TEACHING podlings
> how to work here at Apache.
>
> It is not about making podlings thoughtlessly follow checklists.
>
> It is about TEACHING them what are the important aspects of
> developmen
Hi,
Please update the message subject if you're no longer discussing the
original topic of the thread.
I have no idea what Maven release practices have to do with the
Subversion acceptance vote.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
-
To unsubscr
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all. The
>>> Subversion community has never re
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
>
>> Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all. The
>> Subversion community has never released binaries -- ever -- not do we plan
>> to.
>
> That would a
- Original Message
> From: Greg Stein
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, November 10, 2009 2:54:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was:
> [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Subversion)
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 17:3
ut unless you actually poll gene...@incubator
> for an opinion, running the idea by a few of the more vocal participants
It was right here on gene...@incubator. Part of the "[PROPOSAL][VOTE]
Subversion" thread.
>...
> What I'm looking to see personally is the execution of vo
- Original Message
> From: Greg Stein
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, November 10, 2009 1:58:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was:
> [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Subversion)
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 16:3
On Nov 10, 2009, at 8:29 AM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato > wrote:
Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all.
The
Subversion community has never released binaries -- ever -- not do
we plan
to.
That would a completely n
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 16:39, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> - Original Message
>
>> From: Jukka Zitting
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Sent: Tue, November 10, 2009 1:25:40 PM
>> Subject: Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was:
- Original Message
> From: Jukka Zitting
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, November 10, 2009 1:25:40 PM
> Subject: Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was:
> [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Subversion)
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Nov 10,
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Unfortunately, some documentation needs to be brought in sync.
>
> See: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#checklist
I'm nitpicking, but even there we only ask the podlings to
"demonstrate ability to create Apache releases"
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 14:23, Garrett Rooney
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all. The
>>> Subversion community has never rele
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
>
>> Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all. The
>> Subversion community has never released binaries -- ever -- not do we plan
>> to.
>
> That would a
Greg Stein wrote:
> I have no idea why the term "Board" even comes up in your response.
> What's that got to do with my problems with the IPMC attempting to
> impose make-work on the svn podling?
Because when you post to a broad-list such as general@, you are
communicating to all incubating podlin
Joe Schaefer wrote:
> - Original Message
>
>> From: William A. Rowe Jr.
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Sent: Tue, November 10, 2009 10:08:40 AM
>> Subject: Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was:
>> [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Su
Mark Phippard wrote:
>
> I do not believe the project wants to be in the business of providing
> binaries and we have an existing ecosystem of people that are
> providing them successfully.
As long as non-committer artifacts aren't hosted here, that is no trouble.
If nobody on SVN wants to create
Branko Čibej wrote:
>
> Wait a minute. Are you implying that the "project" *should* release
> binaries? Wouldn't such a requirement apply to, say, APR, to keep this
> close to home?
s/should/may/
Greg pointed out I make win32 binaries and these are not mandated, I do so
only because I trusted th
I have no idea why the term "Board" even comes up in your response.
What's that got to do with my problems with the IPMC attempting to
impose make-work on the svn podling?
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 13:03, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:59, William A. Ro
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 13:02, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> We're making a 1.6.7 release in the next 2-3 weeks, as I stated
>> before. The Incubator can see how that works (I also gave pointers to
>> 1.6.6).
>
> +1 Since Subversion release p
- Original Message
> From: William A. Rowe Jr.
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, November 10, 2009 10:08:40 AM
> Subject: Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was:
> [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Subversion)
> Greg wrote:
> > Look at the
Greg Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:48, William A. Rowe, Jr.
> wrote:
>
>> Quite frankly, all svncorp releases could, with reasonable documentation
>> [read: mailing list archives, CLA's and code grant] be licensed as ASF
>> releases under the AL 2.0, irrespective of their internal ar
Greg Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:59, William A. Rowe, Jr.
> wrote:
>> Greg Stein wrote:
>>>
>>> Podlings should be shepherded *out* rather than held *in*.
>> Hmmm... here you go again. Do you really believe there's a mentor here
>> who doesn't want to be 'done' with their task at h
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> We're making a 1.6.7 release in the next 2-3 weeks, as I stated
> before. The Incubator can see how that works (I also gave pointers to
> 1.6.6).
+1 Since Subversion release procedures already meet most Apache
policies, reviewing any past
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wrote:
> Mark Phippard wrote:
>>
>> I gave counsel to the Eclipse Foundation and explained that they could
>> provide a fully functioning JavaHL library to users with only EPL
>> compatible code. Basically, you just need to build without Neon,
William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> Mark Phippard wrote:
>
>> I gave counsel to the Eclipse Foundation and explained that they could
>> provide a fully functioning JavaHL library to users with only EPL
>> compatible code. Basically, you just need to build without Neon, BDB
>> and libintl support. Of
Mark Phippard wrote:
>
> As an SVN committer, I can say that this is not something that is of
> concern to me (and I dare say I probably speak for all or at least
> most of the other committers when I say that).
Thanks for that reassurance...
> Finally, I will also add that we have had our SVN C
Mark Phippard wrote:
>
> I gave counsel to the Eclipse Foundation and explained that they could
> provide a fully functioning JavaHL library to users with only EPL
> compatible code. Basically, you just need to build without Neon, BDB
> and libintl support. Of the three, the only thing an Eclips
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:23, Kevan Miller wrote:
> On Nov 10, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>...
>> And that is exactly what I'd like to do. But when the Incubator
>> *imposes* requirements of release that does not meet the project's own
>> quality guidelines, for an audience of zero, the
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> Igor Burilo wrote:
>> Michael, sure Neon and Serf are optional and it’s absolutely correct from
>> the legal point of view. But in this case SVN should work without DAV
>> support, which is important for end-users.
>>
>> When we talk about li
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
>
>> Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all. The
>> Subversion community has never released binaries -- ever -- not do we plan
>> to.
>
> That would a
Igor Burilo wrote:
> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>
>>> I certainly understand why license issues would be a concern. But I could
>>> use an education about why this particular case matters. We currently
>>>
> ship
>
>>> Neon in a separate tarball from Subversion's core code for the conv
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:29, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
>
>> Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all. The
>> Subversion community has never released binaries -- ever -- not do we plan
>> to.
>
> That would a co
On Nov 10, 2009, at 10:29 AM, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato
> wrote:
>
>> Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all. The
>> Subversion community has never released binaries -- ever -- not do we plan
>> to.
>
> That would a
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:16, Blair Zajac wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:59, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>> ...
>>> I certainly understand why license issues would be a concern. But I could
>>> use an education about why this particular c
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:59 PM, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> Subversion client and server that doesn't use a DAV layer at all. The
> Subversion community has never released binaries -- ever -- not do we plan
> to.
That would a completely new philosophy for an Apache project, which always aimed
v
On Nov 10, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:48, William A. Rowe, Jr. > wrote:
Greg Stein wrote:
The Apache Incubator is about EDUCATION. It is about TEACHING
podlings
how to work here at Apache.
I'm a little confused. I'm reading a really long rant here, but
On Nov 10, 2009, at 9:16 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:59, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>> ...
>>> I certainly understand why license issues would be a concern. But I could
>>> use an education about why this particula
On Nov 10, 2009, at 7:10 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:59, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> ...
>> I certainly understand why license issues would be a concern. But I could
>> use an education about why this particular case matters. We currently ship
>> Neon in a separate tarba
N client can’t pass legal review on Eclipse and it
means that SVN loosing its huge potential there. It’s a perfect example when
nice technology is blocked by legal tricks. So the perfect solution will be
to replace Neon by Serf, because it will resolve a lot of issues described
above with SV
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:59, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>> Yup. And I'll note that that "limbo" you describe has been an issue
>> with the Board for a long while now. That is why the Board instructed
>> the IPMC to request all podlings to list two items in their reports:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:48, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
>> The Apache Incubator is about EDUCATION. It is about TEACHING podlings
>> how to work here at Apache.
>
> I'm a little confused. I'm reading a really long rant here, but I expect
> if you look at what nearly all men
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> The binaries doesn't matter, Apache releases source code, licensed under
> Apache license v2.0. And we only distribute certain licensed dependencies.
>
> As Greg said, we need to provide solutions that does not force downstream
> users into
The binaries doesn't matter, Apache releases source code, licensed under
Apache license v2.0. And we only distribute certain licensed dependencies.
As Greg said, we need to provide solutions that does not force downstream
users into the (L)GPL world. So, a project that requires these dependencies
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:23 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>> Sponsors
>> * Champion: Greg Stein
>
> Cool
>
>> * Nominated Mentors: Justin Erenkrantz, Greg Stein, Sander Striker, Daniel
>> Rall
>
> Once again, caution against committers == mentors (== 'project leads').
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 07:06, Leo Simons wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:23 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
> wrote:
>> Greg Stein wrote:
>>>
>>> Sponsors
>>> * Champion: Greg Stein
>>
>> Cool
>>
>>> * Nominated Mentors: Justin Erenkrantz, Greg Stein, Sander Striker, Daniel
>>> Rall
>>
>> Once ag
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:23, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>...
>> * Nominated Mentors: Justin Erenkrantz, Greg Stein, Sander Striker, Daniel
>> Rall
>
> Once again, caution against committers == mentors (== 'project leads').
> It puts certain committers above others, an inequitable situation.
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:59, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>...
>> I certainly understand why license issues would be a concern. But I could
>> use an education about why this particular case matters. We currently ship
>> Neon in a separate ta
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:59, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>...
> I certainly understand why license issues would be a concern. But I could
> use an education about why this particular case matters. We currently ship
> Neon in a separate tarball from Subversion's core code for the convenience
> of
Igor Burilo wrote:
>
> C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>> Our goal is to bring our Serf integration up to the quality (in terms of
>>> both user experience and proper API adherence) of our Neon one so that
> Serf
>>> can safely become the new default DAV RA implementation, yes. It's mostly
>>> there, b
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:23 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote:
>>
>> Sponsors
>> * Champion: Greg Stein
>
> Cool
>
>> * Nominated Mentors: Justin Erenkrantz, Greg Stein, Sander Striker, Daniel
>> Rall
>
> Once again, caution against committers == mentors (== 'project leads').
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> ...I am seeking a
> waiver of the "make a release" "requirement". And you can simply wait
> for me to send that, rather than continuing to speculate about whether
> I'm going to rely on seniority or on experience
I like that - at first, the
shortcomings in a
timely
>>fashion.
>
Michael, this is a very good news and it's good that you work on it now,
because licensing issues (Neon license incompatibility) are very important
for us. Hope that you will manage to do it if for SVN 1.7.
Thanks, Igor
--
View t
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> ...Let me put it another way: if the IPMC accepts a proposal with one
> mentor, then I'm fine with that one mentor acting on behalf of the
> IPMC without the need to constantly go back to the IPMC for approval
I see your point, and th
Martijn Dashorst wrote:
>
> Would a waiver be possible for Diversity (large project dominated by 1
> or 2 vendors)? For the minimum required binding votes (small
> communities of 2 committers)?
Such things have been requested, and granted in the past, based on the
demonstrated ability of the proj
Greg Stein wrote:
>
> Yup. And I'll note that that "limbo" you describe has been an issue
> with the Board for a long while now. That is why the Board instructed
> the IPMC to request all podlings to list two items in their reports:
>
> 1) when did you arrive?
> 2) what is left?
>
> Specifically
Joe Schaefer wrote:
>
>> From: Justin Erenkrantz
>>
>> Let me put it another way: if the IPMC accepts a proposal with one
>> mentor, then I'm fine with that one mentor acting on behalf of the
>> IPMC without the need to constantly go back to the IPMC for approval.
>> -- justin
>
> For non-releas
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Martijn Dashorst
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
>> wrote:
>>> To be clear, it's on the mentors to decide what is applicable and
>>> necessary for graduation - not the IPMC as a whole.
>> Nope... The whole I
Greg Stein wrote:
> The Apache Incubator is about EDUCATION. It is about TEACHING podlings
> how to work here at Apache.
I'm a little confused. I'm reading a really long rant here, but I expect
if you look at what nearly all mentors do in their respective podlings,
this is exactly what they provi
Greg Stein wrote:
>
> The Subversion project would like to join the Apache Software
> Foundation to remove the overhead of having to run its own
> corporation. The Subversion project is already run quite like an
> Apache project, and already counts a number of ASF Members amongst
> its committer
Greg Stein wrote:
>
> Sponsors
> * Champion: Greg Stein
Cool
> * Nominated Mentors: Justin Erenkrantz, Greg Stein, Sander Striker, Daniel
> Rall
Once again, caution against committers == mentors (== 'project leads').
It puts certain committers above others, an inequitable situation.
If the
Craig L Russell wrote on Mon, 9 Nov 2009 at 14:12 -0800:
> Hi Greg,
>
> I'm afraid that you have totally mistranslated my message and I have no idea
> why.
>
> I'm not trying to pick a fight.
>
> I'm trying to be reasonable.
>
> I don't perceive your reaction as positive.
>
> I'm not going to
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Leo Simons wrote:
> I have no idea what might be going on in your head, but from where I
> sit, it seems like you might be overreacting just a _bit_ to a
> tongue-in-cheek e-mail post script. Have some green tea.
What is/was going on in my head is expressed "grace
Hi Greg,
I'm afraid that you have totally mistranslated my message and I have
no idea why.
I'm not trying to pick a fight.
I'm trying to be reasonable.
I don't perceive your reaction as positive.
I'm not going to continue this discussion until you have something
concrete to discuss. I vo
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 12:08, Niall Pemberton wrote:
>...
> It seems though that all you're going to do here in the incubator is
> go through the IP clearance and ask for waivers on all the other usual
> steps that a new project goes through. Whats the point of that?
> Whether its a bad precedent
Igor Burilo wrote:
>> We have a number of *user-configurable* dependencies which are not
>> compatible with the AL:
>> - Neon, a HTTP client library, used by libsvn_ra_neon, is LGPL.
>> (An alternative HTTP client library, libsvn_ra_serf uses the Serf
>>library under ALv2.)
>
> Neon is curre
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 09:27, Martijn Dashorst
> wrote:
>> Yes, *AND* ensuring legal dots are put on the i's and j's. This is
>> done through checking the release and ensuring that it is in adherence
>> to our policies which you and others have
ite well".
Thanks, Igor
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/-PROPOSAL--VOTE--Subversion-tp26203843p26269837.html
Sent from the Apache Incubator - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 11:15, Martijn Dashorst
wrote:
>...
> I actually like the way you ask for waivers for stuff that is required
> by the Incubator. But this should be open to any podling, regardless
Never said it was specific to Subversion. You're just jumping up and
down about procedures wit
- Original Message
> From: Justin Erenkrantz
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Mon, November 9, 2009 7:56:53 AM
> Subject: Re: Insanity. Apache Incubator should be about education (was:
> [PROPOSAL][VOTE] Subversion)
>
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:39 PM
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 3:49 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> We certainly have no intent to bring Bad Code into the ASF!
I am sure you do. However that is not the issue I'm going against:
when Good Code is brought into the ASF in a Bad Way or in a Good Way
with Bad Reasoning.
I actually like the way you
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:53, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> On Nov 9, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> I mean, really... how many other projects that are 9.5 years old(*) do
>> we expect to see arriving here? And of those, how many *started* with
>> the ideas and precepts of the Apache Software F
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> OTOH, podlings that don't have 3 active mentors can't get 3 binding
> votes internally, so IPMC members have to jump in sometimes. Thanks to
> those of us who do!
I view the proposal accepting the projects with the listed mentors as
del
On Nov 9, 2009, at 5:23 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
I mean, really... how many other projects that are 9.5 years old(*) do
we expect to see arriving here? And of those, how many *started* with
the ideas and precepts of the Apache Software Foundation? I suspect it
will be zero, so wasting a lot of tim
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> ...I'm mildly uncomfortable with mentors who aren't actually involved in
> the project telling a community what to do - but I accept that as a
> necessity of the Incubation process. However, I'm much more
> uncomfortable when folks who ha
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> This is where I think the Incubator has gone awry: the claim that you
> are an IPMC member implies that you have merit on a project (in the
> form of a binding vote) is false.
Not sure if I am looking at the same incubator as you are. I a
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Leo Simons wrote:
> Also, to be clear, as an IPMC member I spend quite a bit of time with
> projects where I am not a mentor, casting (binding) votes on things
> like their releases. I will continue to do that, inline with procedure
> and policy and common sense. I'
On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:11, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> I am not on either side of the debate here, but Martijn is correct in
> pointing that the formal standard was applied to *all* podlings to date.
I understand, and will simply ask "was that the right thing to do?"
I'm not looking
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
