Hi,
The distribution page [1] exists because it was approved by a previous board,
and projects needed more guidance than was in the current distribution policy.
[2]
I woudl be fine with teh content at [1] being moved to [2].
Kind Regards,
Justin
1. https://incubator.apache.org/guides/distribu
Hi,
> The Incubator should not have parallel policies that may lag behind the
> official policies.
>
>>> * https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
>>>
>>> Somehow we have too many pages tell different part of truth. Before I
>>> knew there is something about KEYS, closer.lua,
On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 16:04, tison wrote:
>
> The related docs are:
>
> * (mainly) https://infra.apache.org/release-download-pages.html
> * https://infra.apache.org/release-publishing.html
> * https://infra.apache.org/release-distribution
There is also
https://www.apache.org/legal/release-polic
> On Mar 28, 2025, at 9:29 AM, sebb wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2025 at 16:04, tison wrote:
>>
>> The related docs are:
>>
>> * (mainly) https://infra.apache.org/release-download-pages.html
>> * https://infra.apache.org/release-publishing.html
>> * https://infra.apache.org/release-distributio
4 at 1:47 PM David Jencks
> wrote:
>
> > Quite a few projects are using Antora, including Camel, Felix, and Aries.
> >
> > David Jencks
> >
> > > On Dec 19, 2024, at 3:11 AM, Justin Mclean
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> &g
id Jencks
>
> > On Dec 19, 2024, at 3:11 AM, Justin Mclean
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >> 1. Are there any requirements for the documentation directory structure
> >> under the website?
> >
> > No, that is up to the project to decide.
&g
Quite a few projects are using Antora, including Camel, Felix, and Aries.
David Jencks
> On Dec 19, 2024, at 3:11 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> 1. Are there any requirements for the documentation directory structure
>> under the website?
>
> No, that
Hi,
> 1. Are there any requirements for the documentation directory structure
> under the website?
No, that is up to the project to decide.
> 2. Are there any requirements for the document generation tool?
Not really, unless the output is under a license not compatible with the Apache
Hello,
Here are questions about documentation for apache projects.
1. Are there any requirements for the documentation directory structure
under the website?
For example, would the following directory structure be acceptable?
- https://.apache.org/docs//
- https://.apache.org/docs///
2
Hi -
I insert some proper links to clarify. A large part of the page is rather
rambling. Maybe later it can be cut back.
For now see if you think it now leads to better action.
Regards,
Dave
> On Dec 1, 2020, at 2:44 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I think the issue may be more clarify
Hi,
I think the issue may be more clarifying and simplifying the original policy
language. Perhaps that can be done at the some time?
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional co
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 11:38 PM Dave Fisher wrote:
> ...I suggest that we eliminate everything that is on the Incubator page
> that is a “duplicate" and point to the source of record...
+1 and we should do that every time we see such duplicates.
-Bertrand
--
On this page:
https://incubator.apache.org/guides/names.html
We are providing what is essentially the same information that is on the
official Branding documentation.
https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/naming.html#namesearch
I suggest that we eliminate everything that is on the Incubator
52 PM, leerho wrote:
> >
> > John,
> > Thank you for your comments.
> >
> > First understand that this site (community.a.o) is maintained by comdev.
> >> Podlings should be following the processes at http://incubator.apache.org/
> >
> >
>
incubator.a.o and could not find any comparable documentation
> that is step-by-step with example template emails. There are several pages
> devoted to educating new committers, but I could not find much on inviting
> new committers. So in the absence of good documentation I used what
Hi,
> I searched incubator.a.o and could not find any comparable documentation
> that is step-by-step with example template emails.
See:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html#adding_new_committers
(Which points to other ASF documentation)
> Because it has been over 24 hours
John,
Thank you for your comments.
First understand that this site (community.a.o) is maintained by comdev.
> Podlings should be following the processes at http://incubator.apache.org/
I searched incubator.a.o and could not find any comparable documentation
that is step-by-step with exam
> On Aug 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:19 PM leerho wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> It is our first time going through the recommended New Committer process
>> and we have uncovered some significant probl
On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 4:19 PM leerho wrote:
> Folks,
>
> It is our first time going through the recommended New Committer process
> and we have uncovered some significant problems with the documentation
> <https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html#new-committer-p
Folks,
It is our first time going through the recommended New Committer process
and we have uncovered some significant problems with the documentation
<https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html#new-committer-process>.
- The most serious problem is step A: of the "Commi
Hey all,
Please check:
https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
Feedback (and patches : o) welcome.
Best Regards,
Myrle
PM
To: Incubator General
Subject: Re: Dubbo's documentation on preparing for an Apache release
Hi community,
Recently the Dubbo project has summarized a document[1] of how to
prepare for an Apache release. Given the recent discussion happening
on the list, I think it might be helpful for other p
projects has made 8 releases, by 5 different
release managers. The documentation did a lot of help.
As projects may be different so the documentation may not be applied
to all the projects.
Please correct me if anything is wrong in the documentation.
[1] http://dubbo.apache.org/en-us/blog/prepare
Hi,
> I am confused, if it does not apply to incubating projects, why this
> page is under http://incubator.apache.org ?
For historical reasons the incubator deals with IP clearance of code donated to
TLPs.
Thanks,
Justin
-
T
Hi,
On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> "This is for projects and PMCs that have already been created and are
>> receiving a code donation into an existing codebase.”
>
> I’m not 100% sure if that applies to incubating projects and PPMC as well but
> it seems it wou
Hi,
> "This is for projects and PMCs that have already been created and are
> receiving a code donation into an existing codebase.”
I’m not 100% sure if that applies to incubating projects and PPMC as well but
it seems it would be good for the PPMC to do the same here as if they were a
PMC oth
Hi,
Perhaps I'm mistaken but the code donated was after / seperate from the initial
donation and need to go through IP clearance as described on this page. [1]
"This is for projects and PMCs that have already been created and are receiving
a code donation into an existing codebase."
Thanks,
Jus
ang wrote:
>
>> The Apache Dubbo (incubating) is receiving a documentation donation
>> for the rest support and more protocol support features[1](previously
>> known as Dubbox) from Dangdang.
>>
>> The acceptance vote has passed on the d...@dubbo.apache.org mailing list
w projects (incubating projects).
>
> John
>
> [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/
>
>
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 5:03 AM Huxing Zhang wrote:
>
> > The Apache Dubbo (incubating) is receiving a documentation donation
> > for the rest support and more protoco
Huxing,
Please note per the top paragraph of [1] the IP Clearance process is not
for new projects (incubating projects).
John
[1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 5:03 AM Huxing Zhang wrote:
> The Apache Dubbo (incubating) is receiving a documentat
The Apache Dubbo (incubating) is receiving a documentation donation
for the rest support and more protocol support features[1](previously
known as Dubbox) from Dangdang.
The acceptance vote has passed on the d...@dubbo.apache.org mailing list [2]
Please vote to approve this contribution.
This
er be wrong. :)
Thanks,
Gunnar
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:45 PM, toki wrote:
> On 12/11/2016 04:09, Gunnar Tapper wrote:
>
> > For documentation, I couldn't find an easy way to do multi-chapter books,
>
> If AOo is meant, use Master Documents.
> There are a couple of
On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 8:45 PM, toki wrote:
> ...Five options, each of which creates a slightly different PDF...
That's (obviously ;-) only relevant if your project wants to produce
PDF documentation.
A large part of Apache projects are perfectly happy with Web-based
documentation w
On 12/11/2016 04:09, Gunnar Tapper wrote:
> For documentation, I couldn't find an easy way to do multi-chapter books,
If AOo is meant, use Master Documents.
There are a couple of use cases (^1 ), where Master Documents don't
work. In those instances, virtually every solution w
On 11/11/2016 07:46, Gunnar Tapper wrote:
> there's a clear preference to use Apache OpenOffice for documentation.
The driving force behind that was Sun's insistence that their own dog
food be eaten.
> Beyond usability (and therefore more willingness to document), it also make
Hi Stain,
I used different wiki technologies for documentation in a previous project.
One of the large blockers was that it was very hard to deal with versioned
documentation, especially when dealing with many different manuals. To me,
wikis work well for documentation targetted to developers
then solve it using Document Compare which is
possible in OO, but much smoother in Microsoft Word.
Apologies to OO devs, but using OpenOffice for documentation sounds to me
like yesterday's approach, where the end target is a static PDF to print
with blurry screenshots (shrunk to fit
6 AM, Gunnar Tapper
> wrote:
> >> ...Talking with other contributors, there's a clear preference to use
> Apache
> >> OpenOffice for documentation
> >
> > *for some people*, right? I think many of us are big fans of creating
> > documentation using stru
For people in this particular incubator. ;)
On Nov 11, 2016 2:37 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz"
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Gunnar Tapper
> wrote:
> > ...Talking with other contributors, there's a clear preference to use
> Apache
> > OpenOffice
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote on 11/11/16 9:37 AM:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Gunnar Tapper
> wrote:
>> ...Talking with other contributors, there's a clear preference to use Apache
>> OpenOffice for documentation
>
> *for some people*, right? I think many o
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Gunnar Tapper wrote:
> ...Talking with other contributors, there's a clear preference to use Apache
> OpenOffice for documentation
*for some people*, right? I think many of us are big fans of creating
documentation using structured text in vers
Hi,
Related to the muti-lingual issue but also separate since it has to do with
tools. This might be the wrong list to so please feel free to redirect.
I've created a lot of documentation for Trafodion using Asciidoc, which
allows the project to include the documentation with the source. It
Hi,
> it is common to have the second sentence about “No other license..” when
> trademarks are used in content that has open licenses.
I’d hardly say it’s common. A google search returns no hits for it (other than
this thread) and no other Adobe OS project that I could find is using it. The
on
Adobe legal pretty much explained the situation as I did. They said that
it is common to have the second sentence about “No other license..” when
trademarks are used in content that has open licenses. So, AIUI, no need
to worry about who can fix missing attributions.
Thanks,
-Alex
On 4/28/15, 8
On 4/27/15, 7:01 AM, "Marvin Humphrey" wrote:
>On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:32 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Marvin Humphrey
>> wrote:
>>> ...So, if I look on the page `flx_olapdatagrid_ol.html`, I see the
>>>following text
>>> in the middle...
>>>
>>> Th
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:32 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Marvin Humphrey
> wrote:
>> ...So, if I look on the page `flx_olapdatagrid_ol.html`, I see the following
>> text
>> in the middle...
>>
>> The product field can have the values: ColdFusion, Flex,
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> ...So, if I look on the page `flx_olapdatagrid_ol.html`, I see the following
> text
> in the middle...
>
> The product field can have the values: ColdFusion, Flex,
> Dreamweaver, and Illustrator
>
> ... and then the following text
Hi,
> 3. Have an authorized agent of Adobe modify the trademark whitelist
>prior to publication.
>
> That seems OK to me since you are an Adobe employee and you are assuring us
> that you have discussed the matter with Adobe legal and obtained permission to
> perform that specific mitigation
HI,
> I would be surprised if this gives me permission to add other Apache
> trademarks to my blog title.
You can add any Apache trademark as long as you correctly attribute it, there’s
no need to ask for permission.
However if it was an Adobe trademark with that extra clause you would need to
On 4/26/15, 9:57 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>HI,
>
>> Are you saying once we let someone use Apache Foo, they can also use
>> Apache Bar without asking again?
>
>As long at as it's correctly attributed and follows Apache trademark
>guidelines/policy [1] there’s no need to ask for permission to
HI,
> Are you saying once we let someone use Apache Foo, they can also use
> Apache Bar without asking again?
As long at as it's correctly attributed and follows Apache trademark
guidelines/policy [1] there’s no need to ask for permission to use an Apache
trademark. You’ll note it states "Anyon
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> "If I missed listing a trademark, I’ll add it in
> the first commit after this donation lands in the repo, but where the
> trademark names are just used in an example to show people how to put a
> list of things in a UI widget, I’ll just replac
On 4/26/15, 9:27 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>HI,
>
>> Isn’t this always the case?
>
>No, it's only the addition of that extra sentence that causes the issue.
The Apache preferred attribution is ""Apache, Apache Foo, and Foo are
trademarks of The Apache Software Foundation. Used with permission
Hi,
> The list of Adobe products in the text at the bottom was created by me
> from a template given to me by Adobe lawyers. Apparently, I missed
> listing a few products.
Are you 100% sure you have permission to modify that list of trademarks, given
the wording of the second sentence? Can you
HI,
> Isn’t this always the case?
No, it's only the addition of that extra sentence that causes the issue.
Thanks,
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: gene
Hi,
> It seems as those Adobe has denied us the use of "ColdFusion", "Dreamweaver",
> and "Illustrator" by not including them in the whitelist, and then using the
> "no other license" language.
Yep that exactly my concern.
> Possible mitigations would be:
>
> 1. Remove "ColdFusion", "Dreamweav
On 4/26/15, 9:10 PM, "Marvin Humphrey" wrote:
>On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>> Please explain in this thread or in the JIRA issue why this a concern.
>> How is this bad for Apache?
>
>So, if I look on the page `flx_olapdatagrid_ol.html`, I see the following
>text
>in the
On 4/26/15, 9:00 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Alex I have no idea what you discussed with Adobe legal so it would be
>better if you raised it.
>
>The issue is the "No other license to the Adobe trademarks are granted.”
>which probbably means we can only use the trademarks initially listed
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> Please explain in this thread or in the JIRA issue why this a concern.
> How is this bad for Apache?
So, if I look on the page `flx_olapdatagrid_ol.html`, I see the following text
in the middle...
The product field can have the values: Col
Hi,
Alex I have no idea what you discussed with Adobe legal so it would be better
if you raised it.
The issue is the "No other license to the Adobe trademarks are granted.” which
probbably means we can only use the trademarks initially listed by Adobe and I
don’t think we can change that list
Justin,
I’m sorry, but I still don’t understand your concern. I think you’ll have
to create the JIRA issue and describe it.
Here’s the template again: "Adobe and are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems
Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries
and are use
Hi,
> Where can I see that non standard attribution?
Alex you mind doing the honours given you had the discussion with Adobe legal.
I assume it would need to be a LEGAL Jira.
JFYI On the weekend I asked an associate at a law firm specialising in IP /
trademark law and their (unpaid) informal v
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> ...Adobe legal have asked to add a non standard attribution which may (or may
> not) exclude
> us using their other trademarks like Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver,
> ColdFusion etc
> that are also contained within the donated con
Hi,
> In my opinion mentioning such trademarks in documentation is perfectly
> ok as long as we acknowledge them, I don't see how that could cause
> harm to their owner.
And normally that would be the case and everything would be fine.
However Adobe legal have asked to add
d to be added...
So IIUC the donated docs that will eventually be published at
http://flex.apache.org/ include mentions of trademarks that we do not
own.
In my opinion mentioning such trademarks in documentation is perfectly
ok as long as we acknowledge them, I don't see how that could cause
har
On 4/23/15, 2:06 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>
>> IIUC this is about additional Flex documentation being donated to be
>> published at http://flex.apache.org/ - if that's correct please
>> provide an example of how a trademark would be used in that context
&
list. Not exactly an open
or transparent process and that’s further reason for concern.
> IIUC this is about additional Flex documentation being donated to be
> published at http://flex.apache.org/ - if that's correct please
> provide an example of how a trademark would be used in th
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:01 PM, jan i wrote:
> ...all these edits need not be completed before the donation is tranferred,
> but should be before any real publication...
Agreed, and the best way to handle this is to create the corresponding
jira tickets before importing the content, to describe
On Thursday, April 23, 2015, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 4/22/15, 3:47 PM, "Justin Mclean" >
> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >> "Adobe Legal says we can fix trademark attributions after committing”
> >
> >By fix did they mean remove them all or add missing trademarks? What
> >exactly was the advice they
quot;?
IIUC this is about additional Flex documentation being donated to be
published at http://flex.apache.org/ - if that's correct please
provide an example of how a trademark would be used in that context,
and how you think it m
On 4/22/15, 3:47 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> "Adobe Legal says we can fix trademark attributions after committing”
>
>By fix did they mean remove them all or add missing trademarks? What
>exactly was the advice they gave?
Like I said upthread "If I missed listing a trademark, I’ll ad
Hi,
> "Adobe Legal says we can fix trademark attributions after committing”
By fix did they mean remove them all or add missing trademarks? What exactly
was the advice they gave?
Given the discussion took place off list and the Flex PMC was not involved in
this donation I have no way of knowi
On 4/22/15, 2:25 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>HI,
>
>> If I missed listing a trademark, I’ll add it in
>
>I think this has come up before (original Flex SDK donation?). From
>memory Adobe is (overly) protective of their (non donatated) trademarks
>wanted to make sure that they don't become dilut
HI,
> If I missed listing a trademark, I’ll add it in
I think this has come up before (original Flex SDK donation?). From memory
Adobe is (overly) protective of their (non donatated) trademarks wanted to make
sure that they don't become diluted by association with open source so would
prefer n
On 4/22/15, 6:38 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> I guess I don’t understand. For review, the language is variations of:
>>
>> "Adobe and Adobe Flash are either registered trademarks or trademarks of
>> Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries
>>and
>> are us
Hi,
> I guess I don’t understand. For review, the language is variations of:
>
> "Adobe and Adobe Flash are either registered trademarks or trademarks of
> Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries and
> are used by permission from Adobe. No other license to the Adob
Hi,
> I don’t think those words would be removed. No other license/permission has
> been granted.
Then can you please explain how we can accept the donation if we don’t have
legal permission to use trademarks it contains.
Thanks,
Justin
On 4/22/15, 12:09 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>(resending from correct email address - sorry if this shows up twice)
>
>> I don’t think those words would be removed. No other
>>license/permission has been granted.
>
>Can you please explain how we can accept the donation if we don’t have
Hi,
(resending from correct email address - sorry if this shows up twice)
> I don’t think those words would be removed. No other license/permission has
> been granted.
Can you please explain how we can accept the donation if we don’t have legal
permission to use trademarks it contains.
Than
On 4/21/15, 1:28 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Adobe Legal says we can fix trademark attributions after committing to
>>the
>> repo as long as we do it quickly.
>
>I assume that means that “No other license to the Adobe trademarks are
>granted.” would need to be removed?
I don’t think t
Hi,
> Adobe Legal says we can fix trademark attributions after committing to the
> repo as long as we do it quickly.
I assume that means that “No other license to the Adobe trademarks are
granted.” would need to be removed?
Thanks,
Justin
Code is accepted.
Adobe Legal says we can fix trademark attributions after committing to the
repo as long as we do it quickly.
Thanks to Justin for finding the things that need more cleanup.
-Alex
On 4/18/15, 6:36 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>+0 (binding) until "No other license to the
Hi,
+0 (binding) until "No other license to the Adobe trademarks are granted.”
issue is sorted, then +1.
Currently this has this added to most (but not all pages):
"Adobe and Adobe Flash are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe
Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or oth
Apache Flex received some of the Adobe Flex online documentation.
http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/flex-doc.html
Please vote to approve this contribution. Lazy consensus applies. If no -1
votes are cast within the next 72 hours, the vote passes.
Thanks,
-Alex
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 6:31 PM, jan i wrote:
> ...So accepting a podling is a procedural vote, maybe that the word we should
> add to http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html#vote...
Yeah or maybe you can be even more precise and add "procedural as per
http://www.apache.org/foundation/vot
On 3 December 2014 at 18:25, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 6:17 PM, jan i wrote:
> > ...Personally I see it as any number of +1 and no -1, but again I still
> cannot
> > find the documentation...
>
> It's at http://www.apache.org/foundation/
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 6:17 PM, jan i wrote:
> ...Personally I see it as any number of +1 and no -1, but again I still cannot
> find the documentation...
It's at http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
-Bertrand
-
a podling is a release.
Personally I see it as any number of +1 and no -1, but again I still cannot
find the documentation.
rgds
jan i.
>
>
> >
> > I am always prepared to be corrected.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 12:09 PM, jan i wrote:
> > >
;
> On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 12:09 PM, jan i wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > I have just called for a vote on corinthia, and got a question about the
> > voting rules from the project.
> >
> > I digged into the documentation, and all I can find is the fact that a
> vo
t; voting rules from the project.
> >
> > I digged into the documentation, and all I can find is the fact that a
> vote
> > has to be called. I cannot find a definition of the vote (yes I can find
> > our general voting rules, but not which one applies in this case).
>
ected.
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 12:09 PM, jan i wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have just called for a vote on corinthia, and got a question about the
> voting rules from the project.
>
> I digged into the documentation, and all I can find is the fact that a vote
> has to be called. I canno
Hi.
I have just called for a vote on corinthia, and got a question about the
voting rules from the project.
I digged into the documentation, and all I can find is the fact that a vote
has to be called. I cannot find a definition of the vote (yes I can find
our general voting rules, but not which
On 12 August 2014 08:52, jan i wrote:
> On 12 August 2014 08:53, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>
>
> Documents are source code written in a natural language :-)
>
>
and without any tests.
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it
On 12 August 2014 08:53, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:32 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
> >> ...if a podling/TLP were to receive a donation of
> >> doc
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:32 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
>> ...if a podling/TLP were to receive a donation of
>> documentation from a third party, should that go through the same reviews
>> as source
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:32 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> ...if a podling/TLP were to receive a donation of
> documentation from a third party, should that go through the same reviews
> as source code donations?...
IMO yes.
Flex did something like that in
http://incubator.apac
Hi all
I was wondering - if a podling/TLP were to receive a donation of
documentation from a third party, should that go through the same reviews
as source code donations?
John
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:10 AM, David Crossley wrote:
>
> ...It is time for me to move on from the Apache Incubator.
> I feel that i have done as much as is possible
You have done a ton indeed!
Thanks very much for your contributions, and hope that our paths cross
again at some point!
-Ber
It is time for me to move on from the Apache Incubator.
I feel that i have done as much as is possible.
There is various documentation to try to assist people
and projects to help themselves:
http://incubator.apache.org/facilities.html
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorIssues2013
If any
David Crossley wrote:
> Daniel Shahaf wrote:
> >
> > Reviewing this, the document you added a link to contains bugs.
>
> Yes, there are many issues with Incubator documentation.
> Thanks for detecting some of them.
>
> Procedures have been changed, so doc
1 - 100 of 215 matches
Mail list logo
