On Wednesday, July 30, 2003 11:36 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
> On 7/30/2003 4:59 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>> Ted Leung wrote, On 30/07/2003 12.15:
>>
>>> And can we get it on the website, please?
>>
>>
>> Well, I would personally say no to having the grant itself there.
>> Donations to the AS
On 7/30/2003 4:59 AM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Ted Leung wrote, On 30/07/2003 12.15:
And can we get it on the website, please?
Well, I would personally say no to having the grant itself there.
Donations to the ASF should at least come through members IMHO and
having the document there enforc
On Wednesday, July 30, 2003, at 09:49 AM, Steven Noels wrote:
If the STATUS file hasn't been updated in 3 months, and you see
something that
needs fixing, update it yourself!
I noticed that you think the incubator PMC is responsible for doing
the *work*
of incubation. That is a false assumption.
i agree with aaron (i think).
i think that if a project coming into the incubator has a
sponsoring project (i.e., an existing asf project will become
its home), then it should be up to the sponsor and the podling
to decide which route to follow for the mailing lists. if the
podling *doesn't* have
On Wednesday, July 30, 2003, at 03:15 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
Yes, I've looked at the STATUS file. You can't miss it -- it's
autoposted every week. That doesn't change that the file hasn't been
updated in 3 months. Yes, the CLAs and the software grant are being
worked on. The code is being s
Steven Noels wrote, On 30/07/2003 14.36:
On 30/07/2003 13:59 Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
And can we get it on the website, please?
Well, I would personally say no to having the grant itself there.
On the website.
Donations to the ASF should at least come through members IMHO and
having the docume
On 30/07/2003 13:59 Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
And can we get it on the website, please?
Well, I would personally say no to having the grant itself there.
Donations to the ASF should at least come through members IMHO and
having the document there enforces it. I'll just add a note pointing to
Ted Leung wrote, On 30/07/2003 12.15:
...
Could we start by answering my question from 7/22 on the correct version
of the software license grant document?
I count three at the moment.
1) http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=incubator-general&m=104803185122794&w=2
2) foundation/software-grant.txt
3) f
Nicola Ken Barozzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Which rules make you so tired? I just blocked the creation of some
> resources for less than a week, and you are already tired? It takes
> years to build good communities, and patience is a virtue. I don't
> honestly think that some days will ruin it
On 7/29/2003 11:51 PM, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Ted Leung wrote, On 29/07/2003 20.11:
...
Why are you blaming the XMLBeans guys for your not having your act
together?
I'm not blaming them in any way, Ted. I'm surprised that this is what
you have gathered from my mails, and if this is the ca
> From: Ted Leung [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 9:10 AM
>>You do realize that I'm neither a member of the Incubator PMC nor do I
>>support its existence. Create the mail list. The name shouldn't be up to
>>the Incubator, it should be up to the XML PMC. Its you're ba
Ted Leung wrote, On 29/07/2003 20.11:
...
Why are you blaming the XMLBeans guys for your not having your act
together?
I'm not blaming them in any way, Ted. I'm surprised that this is what
you have gathered from my mails, and if this is the case, I apologise.
It's all well and good for them to
> From: "Cliff Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> As one of the XMLBeans committers, I have already promised [1] to
> document the process that we've gone through and will go through in
> the incubator. Berin has also volunteered to help document some of these
> decisions. This doesn't solve every
> From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > ASF is incorporated. We have certain rules to abide to, like licensing
> > et all. And also internal rules, that you know quite well, about voting,
> > and about infrastructure policies.
> >
>
> And see, I don't think you're the person who shoul
On Tuesday, July 29, 2003 2:51 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> My opinion is that we will continue to meander around until someone
> who gives a rat's ass about some new project volunteers to set up
> the incubation process. Right now, nobody even wants to chair the PMC
> because anyone who attemp
On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 10:54 PM, Paul Hammant wrote:
3) Web sites will be hosted at
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/subProjectName. Project teams will
desist and redirect web sites formerly the home of the project. The new
site hosted at Apache will not refer to any commercial o
I've no issue with rules, except when we say we have rules but can't
articulate them. Example #1. What should the names of the mailing
lists and CVS be? [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
We don't have that rule. Nicola Ken suggested creating such a rule.
My opinion is that we will conti
Steven Noels wrote, On 29/07/2003 18.50:
On 29/07/2003 10:41 Berin Lautenbach wrote:
Steven Noels wrote:
and see to bring XMLBeans where people can actually help them out.
Apart from Nicola's apparent efforts in keeping the Incubator alive,
most of the real action is done by infrastructure pee
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 19:20:53 +1000
(Subject: Re: xmlbeans project)
Berin Lautenbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
> > The only one thing I felt something out of joint is
> > usage of the term, "Shepherd".
> >
> > In the *real* b
Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
The only one thing I felt something out of joint is
usage of the term, "Shepherd".
In the *real* business world, the role of "Shepherd" would
be called as the role of "Mentor".
The word "Mentor" was (originally) derived from Greek Myth
(Mentor was a good teacher of Odysseus'
On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 00:57:31 -0700
"Cliff Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If Berin or anyone else wants to add some ideas or start adding some
> real content before I do, please go ahead and I'll pick up where you
> leave off. If there's already a better place to start adding this
> conten
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
(I assume you meant me, Cliff -- I get that all the time). I did
indeed volunteer to start documenting what I've learned about how to
Cliff - I do apologise. No excuse at all. With a name like Berin I try
not to make this kind of mistake :>.
For now I've started a page [1]
On Wednesday, July 23, 2003 11:55 PM, Berin Lautenbach wrote:
> Paul Hammant wrote:
>> Ted,
>>
>>> If you look at this message in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
>>> it seems clear that they went into the incubator @jakarta
>>>
>>> http://archives.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listId=129&msgNo
Paul Hammant wrote:
Ted,
If you look at this message in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
it seems clear that they went into the incubator @jakarta
http://archives.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listId=129&msgNo=2
So incubator folks, what is the correct policy here?
Both Tapesptry and Lenya we
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 23:27:13 +0900
Tetsuya Kitahata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <>
>
>
>
> The XXX pmc has agreed to accept the YYY project for incubation.
> To aid in the process,
> Please create these below:
>
>
Aaron Bannert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 07:23 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>
> > IMHO it depends on what the incubator PMC does. If they *do* create
> > the
> > lists and the such then maybe they should set policy (meaning telling
> > other
> > people what
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:17:45 +0200
Erik Abele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 25/07/2003, at 02:40, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 14:14:04 +0200 "Sander Striker"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I'm 0 on both suggestions. Go with this one for now*. And lets not
> >> delay k
> From: Erik Abele [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 3:18 PM
[...]
> Okay, I'm fine with this for now, but without an explicitly stated
> policy this discussion will come up every time a project arrives at the
> incubator. We definitely need a policy here, IMHO!
I agree.
On 25/07/2003, at 02:05, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
On 7/25/03 7:46 AM, "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It's simple:
The Incubator PMC is responsible for the project. All others (can)
help.
No this is difference than in the past. Remember the Incubator is
here to
help and its OUR
On 25/07/2003, at 02:40, Tetsuya Kitahata wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 14:14:04 +0200 "Sander Striker"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm 0 on both suggestions. Go with this one for now*. And lets not
delay kicking off a project for this for too long.
applause!!
Okay, I'm fine with this for now, but w
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 14:14:04 +0200
"Sander Striker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [ ] project-subproject CVS
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> I'm 0 on both suggestions. Go with this one for now*. And lets not
> delay kicking off a project for
> From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 3:48 PM
> Since IMHO this has been already discussed enough and different POVs
> remain, I ask for a vote on the following.
>
> What should we use as a policy in creating resources for incubating
> projects?
>
On 24 Jul 2003 07:17:38 +0200
"Andreas Kuckartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So incubator folks, what is the correct policy here?
>
> Lenya is also incubated @cocoon.apache.org and not @incubator.apache.org
>
> I do not see much sense in moving mailing lists arround. Please avoid
> such need
> This is embarrassing. How can we have incubated several projects and
> not have this worked out?
These problems are typical for self-incubating incubators ;-)
Andreas
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additio
On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 11:20 AM, Ted Leung wrote:
This is embarrassing. How can we have incubated several projects and
not have this worked out? No wonder people are complaining about the
incubator.
It was never this big of an issue then (and I still don't think
it's that big of an
On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 07:23 AM, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
IMHO it depends on what the incubator PMC does. If they *do* create
the
lists and the such then maybe they should set policy (meaning telling
other
people what do do == policy). If they rely on the XML project and the
XMLBeans f
On 7/24/03 4:21 AM, "Paul Hammant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ted,
>
Ok,
Is the issue here being @xml vs being @incubator? If they need to
be @incubator that's totally fine with me.
Or is there something that I'm missing?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> IIUC it's all there is to i
On 24/07/2003, at 03:48, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Since IMHO this has been already discussed enough and different POVs
remain, I ask for a vote on the following.
What should we use as a policy in creating resources for incubating
projects?
...
I'm not on the incubator pmc but I'd like to see
Nicola Ken Barozzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I do not see much sense in moving mailing lists arround. Please
> >> avoid such needless work.
>
> Then incubating would be needless work anyhow, we would make the project
> go live as final right away 8->
I do not hope that the main sense of the
Ted,
Ok,
Is the issue here being @xml vs being @incubator? If they need to
be @incubator that's totally fine with me.
Or is there something that I'm missing?
IIUC it's all there is to it.
If you look at this message in the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
it seems clear that they went into
On Wednesday, July 23, 2003, at 10:17 PM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
Lenya is also incubated @cocoon.apache.org and not
@incubator.apache.org
It's the only project now being incubated like this. IMO it was an error.
I do not see much sense in moving mailing lists arround. Please
avoid such needless
I can't remember if we have a precedence set here or not, but
if PMC wants the mailing lists created in their namespace,
than I see no reason not to go that way.
-aaron
On Wednesday, July 23, 2003, at 10:17 PM, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
So incubator folks, what is the correct policy here?
Lenya is
> So incubator folks, what is the correct policy here?
Lenya is also incubated @cocoon.apache.org and not @incubator.apache.org
I do not see much sense in moving mailing lists arround. Please avoid such
needless work.
Cheers,
Andreas
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Ted Leung wrote, On 23/07/2003 10.03:
Ok,
Is the issue here being @xml vs being @incubator? If they need to be
@incubator that's totally fine with me.
Or is there something that I'm missing?
IIUC it's all there is to it.
If you look at this message in the [EMAIL PR
Ted Leung wrote, On 23/07/2003 10.03:
Ok,
Is the issue here being @xml vs being @incubator? If they need to be
@incubator that's totally fine with me.
Or is there something that I'm missing?
IIUC it's all there is to it.
It would help if the docs on incubation were a bit clearer as far as the
Ok,
Is the issue here being @xml vs being @incubator? If they need to be
@incubator that's totally fine with me.
Or is there something that I'm missing?
It would help if the docs on incubation were a bit clearer as far as the
process inside the incubator namely
between incubator entry and exit
Ted Leung wrote, On 23/07/2003 1.24:
Dear root,
The XML pmc has agreed to accept the XMLBean project for incubation. To
aid in the process:
please create the xml-xmlbeans CVS and the following mailing lists:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also please setup mailing list
47 matches
Mail list logo
