David Crossley wrote:
Garrett Rooney wrote:
David Crossley wrote:
2) Add the status page and update website:
http://incubator.apache.org/howtoparticipate.html#Updating+the+site
As a mentor, Erik, you should be able to add it. If someone can clarify
the acceptance then i will add it.
Okay, i have d
Garrett Rooney wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> >2) Add the status page and update website:
> >http://incubator.apache.org/howtoparticipate.html#Updating+the+site
> >As a mentor, Erik, you should be able to add it. If someone can clarify
> >the acceptance then i will add it.
Okay, i have done that
David Crossley wrote:
Oh, i hate to see stuff go unanswered - i don't know the procedure either
but will try my best. With the outcome of this we should create a
very simple Guidelines document to show the steps.
Erik Hatcher wrote:
If there are things that I can do to give Garrett karma or update
Oh, i hate to see stuff go unanswered - i don't know the procedure either
but will try my best. With the outcome of this we should create a
very simple Guidelines document to show the steps.
Erik Hatcher wrote:
> If there are things that I can do to give Garrett karma or update the
> website, let
If there are things that I can do to give Garrett karma or update the
website, let me know. I'm not quite sure how I fit in and what powers
I have to push things without assistance.
Thanks,
Erik
On Feb 24, 2005, at 7:21 PM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
Garrett Rooney wrote:
Erik Hatcher wrote:
Garrett Rooney wrote:
Erik Hatcher wrote:
Getting the Forrest website going would be a good step to tackle. See
the Incubator site for some details, as well as cloning how Nutch is
set up:
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/nutch.html
Well, I don't think I have the karma to commit to the
Erik Hatcher wrote:
Getting the Forrest website going would be a good step to tackle. See
the Incubator site for some details, as well as cloning how Nutch is set
up:
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/nutch.html
Well, I don't think I have the karma to commit to the incubator section
of
On Feb 21, 2005, at 5:46 PM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
Erik Hatcher wrote:
The Lucene PMC has unanimously voted to accept the Lucene4c codebase.
Let's bring it into incubation!
What's next?
I figure this probably fell off most people's radar over the weekend,
but just so there's something sitting in
Erik Hatcher wrote:
The Lucene PMC has unanimously voted to accept the Lucene4c codebase.
Let's bring it into incubation!
What's next?
I figure this probably fell off most people's radar over the weekend,
but just so there's something sitting in the top of the inbox, ping?
From a "getting the pr
The Lucene PMC has unanimously voted to accept the Lucene4c codebase.
Let's bring it into incubation!
What's next?
Erik
On Feb 17, 2005, at 2:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Feb 17, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
It seems that the best course of action is for the Lucene PMC to vot
On Feb 17, 2005, at 11:30 AM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
It seems that the best course of action is for the Lucene PMC to vote
whether they want to accept the project for incubation (which they are
currently doing), then bring the project into the incubator and try to
build up a more sustainable comm
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I'd gladly bring the codebase into Lucene's repository if that is the
consensus. It was created entirely by Garrett and he's agreed to
donate it, so the IP should be pretty clear cut.
Do you have a community for it, or just a place? If this isn't something
that the Lucene
Erik Hatcher wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 2005, at 10:23 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>> All donated code should really go through the Incubator, even if only
>>> to do the required IP checklist.
> I'm not sure what is meant by "register the IP stuff here".
I'm in an airplane, and can't check the URL, but
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
Garrett,
You're right that all new code bases should come through the Incubator.
However, the appropriate PMC to vote on whether it should be accepted
into the incubator is the sponsoring PMC, which in this case appears to
be the Lucene PMC. (The Incubator PMC does sponsor som
Garrett,
You're right that all new code bases should come through the Incubator.
However, the appropriate PMC to vote on whether it should be accepted
into the incubator is the sponsoring PMC, which in this case appears to
be the Lucene PMC. (The Incubator PMC does sponsor some projects,
usually
On Feb 14, 2005, at 12:36 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
On Feb 14, 2005, at 10:23 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
All donated code should really go through the Incubator, even if only
to
do the required IP checklist.
Right.
By my question is why doesn't this go through the Lucene project? The
Lucene P
Garrett Rooney wrote:
I'd like to propose the Lucene4c project for incubation.
+1. I would love to see Lucene4c take off, and making it part of Lucene
would be a great boost to it.
-Paul
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECT
On Feb 14, 2005, at 12:41 PM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
On Feb 14, 2005, at 10:23 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
All donated code should really go through the Incubator, even if
only to
do the required IP checklist.
Right.
By my question is why doesn't this go through the Lucene pro
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
On Feb 14, 2005, at 10:23 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
All donated code should really go through the Incubator, even if only to
do the required IP checklist.
Right.
By my question is why doesn't this go through the Lucene project? The
Lucene PMC could bring the codebase into
On Feb 14, 2005, at 10:23 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
All donated code should really go through the Incubator, even if only
to
do the required IP checklist.
Right.
By my question is why doesn't this go through the Lucene project? The
Lucene PMC could bring the codebase into their project and regist
All donated code should really go through the Incubator, even if only to
do the required IP checklist.
On Feb 14, 2005, at 8:59 AM, Erik Hatcher wrote:
I presume this codebase is substantial enough that it requires
incubation? Or because it was a single developer, could he contribute
it directly
I'd love to see this happen, and bringing it into the Lucene Project
proper seems to make sense, from a Lucene outsider.
-Brian
On Feb 14, 2005, at 8:35 AM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
I'd like to propose the Lucene4c project for incubation.
Lucene4c is a port of the Lucene search engine from Java to C
Erik Hatcher wrote:
I presume this codebase is substantial enough that it requires
incubation? Or because it was a single developer, could he contribute
it directly to the Lucene project and bypass incubation?
It's currently about 6500 lines of C code. I'm not sure what the cutoff
point is (or
I presume this codebase is substantial enough that it requires
incubation? Or because it was a single developer, could he contribute
it directly to the Lucene project and bypass incubation?
Erik
On Feb 14, 2005, at 8:35 AM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
I'd like to propose the Lucene4c project
I'd like to propose the Lucene4c project for incubation.
Lucene4c is a port of the Lucene search engine from Java to C, using the
Apache Portable Runtime library for portability. The project is far
from complete, and code to date is primarily concerned with reading an
existing Lucene index, whi
25 matches
Mail list logo
