Hi folks,
Our mailing list search is still broken. Is there any reason why we're
still pointing people to the Incubator archives?
On 25 October 2013 20:58, Noah Slater wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Mailing list search on our site still points to the incubator:
>
> http://cloudstac
Bump.
On 25 October 2013 20:58, Noah Slater wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Mailing list search on our site still points to the incubator:
>
> http://cloudstack.apache.org/mailing-lists.html
>
> I recall discussing this in the past with someone and was asked to
> hold back, as the I
,
--
Noah Slater
https://twitter.com/nslater
>
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Hugo
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On 16 aug. 2013, at 01:06, Noah Slater wrote:
> >
> >> Devs,
> >>
> >> Got some more cosmetic edits to make. :) I noticed that our by-laws look
> >>
document.
@@ -316,7 +316,7 @@
Any active committer or PMC member may call a vote. The vote must occur on
the
project development mailing list.
-3.5. Voting Timeframes
+## 3.5. Voting Timeframes
Formal votes are open for a period of at least 72 hours to allow all active
voters time to consid
Thanks Hugo. Will wrap this up now!
On 13 August 2013 06:30, Hugo Trippaers wrote:
> +1
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hugo
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 12 aug. 2013, at 20:01, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> > Bumping the thread for a 3rd +1 vote from the PMC. Our by-laws st
Okay, thanks folks. 4 +1 votes, 3 of which are binding. The vote is a
success. I will apply the patch.
On 5 August 2013 22:43, Noah Slater wrote:
> Hi dev,
>
> I have some more by-law changes to propose. This is essentially round 2
> for these changes. I incorporated feedback f
Bumping the thread for a 3rd +1 vote from the PMC. Our by-laws stipulate we
need 3 +1 PMC votes.
Thanks.
On 5 August 2013 22:43, Noah Slater wrote:
> Hi dev,
>
> I have some more by-law changes to propose. This is essentially round 2
> for these changes. I incorporated feedback f
Ignore this. Unfortunately, we only have 2 +1 votes from the PMC. I am
going to try to get a third. Sorry for the confusion.
On 12 August 2013 18:55, Noah Slater wrote:
> 3 +1 votes, and the vote passes. I will update the by-laws now.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> On 6 August 2013 20
2013 1:58 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Update by-laws: non-technical decisions and other
> minor
> > changes
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On 8/5/13 2:43 PM, "Noah Slater" wrote:
> >
> > >Hi dev,
> > >
> > &g
fying this document.
Lazy majority of active PMC members
-Any active committer or PMC member may call a vote. The vote must occur on
a
+Any active committer or PMC member may call a vote. The vote must occur on
the
project development mailing list.
3.5. Voting Timeframes
--
Noah Slater
https://twitter.com/nslater
We got 4 +1 votes, so the vote was successful. I'll make the changes now.
Thanks peeps!
On 29 July 2013 22:55, Noah Slater wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to make several changes to our by-laws, but before I continue,
> I've prepared a changset that tidies up whitespace
Hi,
I'd like to make several changes to our by-laws, but before I continue,
I've prepared a changset that tidies up whitespace and hard wraps. This
will make it easier to edit.
The only non-whitespace change my patch makes is to correct two spelling
errors:
Transparancy -> Transparency
desicion
sus and there can't really be a major dissent
> in my thought process. Veto also requires a through explanation why.
>
> 2 cents,
> Matt
>
>
>
> On 7/19/13 1:27 PM, "Noah Slater" wrote:
>
> >Specifically, Chip is calling for us to change committer /
n't want really to take this one on the Bylaws
> side. :-)
>
> Matt
>
>
> On 7/24/13 1:19 PM, "Noah Slater" wrote:
>
> >Nope. Sorry. Feel free to run with it. If not, I can see about doing
> >another vote in the next few days.
> >
> &g
Nope. Sorry. Feel free to run with it. If not, I can see about doing
another vote in the next few days.
On 24 July 2013 18:02, Mathias Mullins wrote:
> Noah,
>
> Did you ever review / report / re-vote this?
>
> Thanks,
> Matt
>
>
> On 6/25/13 11:17 AM, "Noah Sla
Yes, ignoring our egregious mis-use of that term, I am +1 on your idea.
Though, perhaps 3/4 is safer.
Consensus is important, yes. But the bigger the PMC, the harder it is to
achieve. And more often than not, I see no reason to block an action when a
supermajority are clearly in favour of it. Let'
Specifically, Chip is calling for us to change committer / PMC votes from
"lazy consensus" to "2/3 majority". (That is, the vote type for that
specific decision making process changes, but the vote type definitions are
left alone.)
On 19 July 2013 17:32, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2
nitiate a
> non-technical
> +decision making process.
>
>
>
> Matt Mullins
> Cloud Platforms Implementation Engineer
> Worldwide Cloud Services Citrix System, Inc.
> +1 (407) 920-1107 Office/Cell Phone
> matt.mull...@citrix.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/
tivities" or involve "technical decisions".
Do you think our by-laws need a section clarifying technical vs.
non-technical? What should it say?
On 20 June 2013 15:14, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 08:21 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Devs,
> >
I don't consider a website change to be technical.
On 20 June 2013 15:14, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 08:21 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Devs,
> >
> > I would like to call a vote on the following modification to our by-laws.
> > This is in re
Uh... [This is in response to the] quoted thread wherein Sebastian
highlights that we have nothing in our by-laws to tell us how to make
general non-technical decisions.
On 20 June 2013 14:21, Noah Slater wrote:
> Devs,
>
> I would like to call a vote on the following modification
ctive committer or PMC member may call a vote. The vote must occur on
a
+Any active committer or PMC member may call a vote. The vote must occur on
the
project development mailing list.
3.5. Voting Timeframes
On 20 June 2013 13:14, Noah Slater wrote:
> Sebastian,
>
> Thanks for the wra
While we're talking about bot etiquette... ;) If people used #info and
#action, important takeaway points would be included at the top of the
email. As it is, it's a bit hard to read through the logs if you just want
to get a jist.
On 13 June 2013 15:56, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13,
Nice one. Thanks Chip!
On 31 May 2013 17:38, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:32:58AM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to propose moving the project's bylaws [1] from the wiki to the
> > project's website svn location. IMO, this will allow for a cleaner
Or that... ;) Generally, the RM is free to abort for any reason! (Though,
typically, we'd expect it to be a good one.)
On 29 May 2013 19:39, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 07:37:59PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > John, note that releases are majority approval, s
John, note that releases are majority approval, so -1 votes are not vetos.
We'd only abort the vote if we failed to get three binding +1 votes, or
there were more -1 votes than +1 votes.
On 29 May 2013 15:09, John Burwell wrote:
> -0. I don't believe we should be shipping a release with known
Yep! Welcome!
On 28 May 2013 22:56, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> wow,
> I obtained voting right by subscribing. Beats Verhoeven's view on the
> matter, the starship troopers way ;)
>
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 11:43 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> > Users are *by definit
May 28, 2013 at 11:14 PM, Sebastien Goasguen >wrote:
>
> >
> > On May 28, 2013, at 2:36 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> >
> > > Sebastien,
> > >
> > > Nope, we don't do votes on the users@ list. That list is just for user
> > > support.
Sebastien,
Nope, we don't do votes on the users@ list. That list is just for user
support.
Decision making happens on dev@*, and if users want to take part in that,
they can subscribe.
* Or marketing@, private@, and security@
On 27 May 2013 08:53, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
>
> On May 24, 201
Agree with the "we don't have to get this perfect right away" approach.
On 28 May 2013 18:17, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
> +1
>
> While I appreciate the don't-play-favorites sentiments, I do feel that we
> are over thinking this issue. If favoritism becomes an issue, we can
> revisit. At that poin
As a committer you have a binding vote. However, our by-laws do not make it
clear what sort of decision-making process we use for non-technical matters
such as this. So I am not sure whether your -1 counts as a veto.
On 27 May 2013 19:14, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> -1 list of books etc. on website (b
-0
I think we should be listing books, but I would prefer it to be on the wiki.
(Note that your vote email should include +0 and -0, which are weak
approval/disapproval.)
On 27 May 2013 09:27, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After a relatively long discussion on the marketing@ list about
Is this am argument for keeping the Debian packaging in a seperate repo?
cloudstack-deb, perhaps? Repositories are cheap.
On Monday, 27 May 2013, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> Hi Chip,
>
> I'm sorry, this is a -1 again.
>
> Hiroaki found a bug in the Deb packaging again, with commit:
> c4d61897d934
+1
On 22 May 2013 16:32, Chip Childers wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to propose moving the project's bylaws [1] from the wiki to the
> project's website svn location. IMO, this will allow for a cleaner
> update process (easier to provide a diff of a proposed change).
>
> Any objections? I'll
This sounds like a great initiative. Anyone interested in coordinating this?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jim Jagielski
Date: 17 May 2013 14:11
Subject: Grace Hopper Open Source Day
To: "memb...@apache.org"
Cc: Apache Board
I am forwarding this email on behalf of Leslie Hawth
We need to be careful about how we approach this. A "release" is something
that is voted on. A "release candidate" is something that is about to be
voted on. If you you don't vote on something, it's not a release. And if
you've voted on something, it's no longer a candidate. :)
Two things we could
(Copied from elsewhere...)
I've been involved in similar discussions about what to do with pull
requests on GitHub, etc. I think the general consensus was that as long as
there is a reasonable indication that the work was being contributed to the
project, then we are okay to include it. i.e. If so
Congratulations!
On 4 May 2013 13:54, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked
> Isaac Chiang to become a committer and we are pleased to announce that
> they have accepted.
>
> Among several things, Isaac has translated the entire docum
Wow. This is a great idea!
On CouchDB we have couchdb-admin.git and we keep stuff like this in that
repos. Might we want to consider something similar? (We also use it to keep
email templates in, etc.)
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=couchdb-admin.git
On 23 April 2013 14:36, Chip Child
ed can be notified on
> potential opportunities to work on. When you get a chance please review
> and provide feedback
>
> Animesh
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Noah Slater [mailto:nsla...@apache.org]
> > Sent: Friday, May 03, 2013 11:40 AM
> &g
it can be dropped
> and just call it maintainers or other inviting name.
>
>
> [1]
> http://markmail.org/message/udidz5fsgolng2xs?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Ecloudstack-dev+auto+assignment+from
> :"Animesh+Chaturvedi"&page=1
>
>
> > -Original Me
Nalley wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Noah Slater
> wrote:
> >> Devs,
> >>
> >> I would like to propose that we turn on notifications for pull requests
> >> that are made via GitHub. This will ensure that PRs are not "lost
> between
&
Hi folks,
While reading the meeting minutes, I found a link to:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Current+Maintainers+Per+Component
I feel concerned about the distinction between "primary maintainer" and
"secondary maintainer". I believe this could discourage contribution. S
LGTM
On 1 May 2013 20:28, Chip Childers wrote:
> It's report time for us again (we are on a monthly schedule for our
> first quarter as a TLP).
>
> I'll provide a draft in the next couple of days, and kindly ask that
> others review / edit it prior to submission... unless someone beats me
> to
Aha, thanks!
On 29 April 2013 04:28, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> Noah, I opened a bug on this weeks ago, and had reported to the mailing
> list.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6130
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Devs,
>
* and the Apache license...
On 27 April 2013 18:24, Noah Slater wrote:
> Good question, John! We will handle it the same way we handle patches that
> come in via JIRA, or the mailing list, or any other channel. i.e. The
> creation of a PR against the official mirror is seen as an indi
t; On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> > On 27 April 2013 17:35, Noah Slater wrote:
> >
> > > If we reach consensus, I will start the corresponding [VOTE] thread and
> > > complete the rest of process.
> > >
> >
> > D
On 27 April 2013 17:35, Noah Slater wrote:
> If we reach consensus, I will start the corresponding [VOTE] thread and
> complete the rest of process.
>
D'oh. That's what I get for copying and pasting email templates.
Edit: if we reach consensus, I will just go ah
Thanks, Rohit. I marked mine as a dupe!
On 27 April 2013 17:30, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Thanks Noah, I've had raised an issue with infra a long time ago but that
> is still open:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6061
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 9
e I stated lazy consensus So I am
doing this a second time, properly. Sorry about that folks!)
Thanks,
On 7 October 2012 03:03, Noah Slater wrote:
> I've been talking with Paul Davis about how we can fix this situation. But
> no, at the moment, you cannot merge them directly in GitHub
Devs,
I have requested that our GitHub repository be moved to indicate we are no
longer in incubation.
Follow along here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6203
Thanks,
--
NS
Okay, thanks Prasanna!
On 17 April 2013 07:44, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 02:07:45PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Okay, some success.
> >
> > Here is a mail sent to infrastruct...@apache.org:
> >
> > On 16 April 2013 13:44, Tony Steven
Thanks for the great summary Animesh. Agree with Chip. Great thread. :)
On 26 April 2013 01:11, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 05:02:05PM -0700, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
> > Let me attempt to summarize this thread, if I missed any glaring points
> feel free to bring them up
> >
This would make a good blog post and tweet!
On 9 April 2013 21:25, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Folks, [BCC: users@]
>
> Apache Software Foundation (ASF) has been accepted has a mentoring
> organization for the 2013 Google Summer of Code.
>
> If you wish to be a mentor for a student to work on a
Give me a shout if you'rein town and I'll come for drinks and meet some of
you folks.
On 25 April 2013 15:34, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Folks,
>
> The Xen hackathon is being held in Dublin, Ireland on May 16/17th.
>
> Is anyone interested to go there and actually work on improving Xen/XCP
> s
(Typo, but you can fill in any number you feel like...)
On 24 April 2013 12:57, Noah Slater wrote:
> Also + for the initiative!
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 20:15, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 4/21/13 3:21 PM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>>
&g
Also + for the initiative!
On 23 April 2013 20:15, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
>
>
> On 4/21/13 3:21 PM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>
> >Hi folks.
> >
> >I've been thinking about our install process lately.
> >
> >We currently require folks to muck about with firewall settings, NFS
> >settings, network
I see where David is coming from.
The longer you leave a release branch, the harder it becomes to QA, the
harder it comes to test, and the harder it becomes to release. As has been
mentioned already, you can think of this as a "release cost". More regular
releases keep complexity down, and reduce
Damn. I didn't make it in time. I got half way through, though. In case it
helps, here are my notes...
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/cloudstack/KEYS
Old location, needs updating, in both email and wiki. Done the wiki now.
> Get the commit hash from the VOTE email (ex:
4c
It's a little more nuanced than that. ;) It's very possible that we would
ship a new release that actually introduces known bugs. It is much less
likely that we would ship a release that introduces known critical bugs. In
the end, it is up to the community to decide. And that is a process of a
rele
Yes, we have rules. :)
A release will pass if it receives 3 binding +1 votes, and more +1 votes
than -1 votes in total.
On 17 April 2013 15:11, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> Do we have rules set out around this? It seems that we wouldn't stop a
> time-based bug fix release from going out just becau
Okay, some success.
Here is a mail sent to infrastruct...@apache.org:
On 16 April 2013 13:44, Tony Stevenson wrote:
> Noah Slater wrote on Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 01:33:39PM +0100:
> > Hi,
> >
> > It recently came up on the CloudStack list that if cloudstack.org moves
> &
the policy.
If there's anything that seems relevant I will loop back to this thread.
On 10 April 2013 07:55, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> Time to find an alternate domain for jenkins then. :(
>
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 05:40:56PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Ack :(
>
+1
On 11 April 2013 15:39, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:51:34PM +, Abhinandan Prateek wrote:
> > Yes, I think we need to space our releases further apart.
>
> That's a different discussion, which you are free to raise if you'd like.
>
> > Also community members should v
at a good solution that works.
>
>
> Kudos to the community !
>
>
> On 11/04/13 7:17 PM, "Noah Slater" wrote:
>
> >I believe it is possible to "mention" someone in a JIRA ticket in such a
> >way that they get notified. Might this be an e
On 11 April 2013 15:11, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
>
> I'm against a policy of never assigning tickets, but it shouldn't be the
> norm for one set of folks to triage tickets and assign them to another
> set of folks.
Me too.
We should establish:
a) A rule that we avoid ticket assignment by defau
to whatever the community decides here.
>
> Also community members should volunteer to own some part so that in above
> circumstances a person looking for some fix can approach that member, once
> again a suggestion.
>
>
>
> On 11-Apr-2013, at 5:17 PM, "Noah Slater" >
that that system will create.
>
>
> On 11/04/13 5:04 PM, "John Burwell" wrote:
>
> >+1
> >
> >On Apr 11, 2013, at 7:22 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> >
> >> On 11 April 2013 11:22, Abhinandan Prateek
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >
On 11 April 2013 11:22, Abhinandan Prateek wrote:
>
> 7-8 days is a huge time lost. I was suggesting that this to be 3 days. Let
> other community members chime in too.
I should have replied to this in my previous missive. But I want to
reenforce how unhealthy I believe this practice is. 7-8 day
On 11 April 2013 04:08, Abhinandan Prateek wrote:
>
> Now is it wrong to ask the community members who have expertise on UI to
> fix it, in a bid to help Chip get the release out ?
>
It is certainly not wrong to co-ordinate with people in an effort to ship a
release. (I would point out, however,
Got it. Thanks! :)
On 9 April 2013 19:29, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
>
> > When you say it's understandable that people being paid to work on
> > CloudStack full time engage in cookie licking, do you mean to say you
>
When you say it's understandable that people being paid to work on
CloudStack full time engage in cookie licking, do you mean to say you think
it is acceptable? Or do you believe we should be working to prevent it?
On 9 April 2013 19:14, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Pra
ve echoed similar
> sentiments.
>
> --David
>
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Strange this was on infra-private, and not infra (which is also
> private). I
> > only subscribe to the latter. I found your message now. Disappointing. I
>
alley wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Do you have a link to the discussion thread, David? I can't find anything
> > in my mail.
> >
>
> You'll need to use your member karma, as it's on infra-private:
> 097901ce30c3$c69ff210$53dfd630$@16degrees.com.au
>
--
NS
Do you have a link to the discussion thread, David? I can't find anything
in my mail.
On 9 April 2013 15:46, David Nalley wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Chip Childers
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 01:34:01PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 07:21:3
I shouldn't expect so.
On 9 April 2013 14:13, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 01:34:01PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 07:21:30PM -0400, David Nalley wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Chip Childers <
> chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote:
>
You might want to speak to Infra about it first.
On 9 April 2013 00:34, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
> > Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 2:05 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUS
y/CLOUDSTACK/2013-04+Board+Report+for+Apache+CloudStack
>
> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Chip Childers
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 07, 2013 at 09:24:38PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> >> Chip, it looks better like this, for sure.
> >>
> >> Wondering if you&
ght want to re-work to fit the
template, but I hardly doubt it's necessary.
Perhaps we should add a bullet point item about the "hat wearing" issues
we've been discussing? (See the thread on assigning bugs to people in JIRA.)
On 5 April 2013 17:24, Chip Childers wrote:
>
Looks like good info, Chip. This would make a good public project update.
But perhaps this is a little wordy for a board report. Is there a way we
can compress this? Perhaps cutting out any secondary or tertiary detail.
The board typically review about 40 reports per month, I think? So there's
a lo
Okay, this is the diff:
https://paste.apache.org/g5hX
I don't... I am confused. Heh. The live site looks different from what is
apparently in Subversion...
On 3 April 2013 14:28, Noah Slater wrote:
> Dropping users@...
>
> You did? I just edited a page on the site, seconds
I think they might just pick it up automatically. I don't believe Infra
ever ping them.
On 3 April 2013 13:52, Chip Childers wrote:
> Does anyone want to own figuring out how to notify markmail about our
> mailing list changes?
>
> We've changed:
>
> 1) moved from incubator.apache.org to clouds
Dropping users@...
You did? I just edited a page on the site, seconds before reading this
email... Confused. I'll jump on IRC.
On 3 April 2013 14:25, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:19:14PM +0100, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Dear community,
> >
> > I w
Dear community,
I would like to announce that we now have an announcement list.
To wit:
annou...@cloudstack.apache.org
This is a low-volume public list for release announcements and security
disclosures only.
Subscribe by sending an email to:
announce-subscr...@cloudstack.apache.org
Dear community,
Right now, we have people who are regularly going through JIRA and triaging
tickets. This is totally fantastic, and a very valuable activity for the
project. (So thank you!) But I also notice that specific individuals are
being assigned to the tickets in the process.
This is a for
Can we have the meeting in the Bat-cave as well? :P
On 2 April 2013 17:05, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> IRC meeting tomorrow, same Bat-time, same Bat-channel.
> (#cloudstack-meeting on Freenode, 17:00 UTC).
>
> That's 1 p.m. Eastern, 10 a.m. Pacific, and 6 p.m. in London.
>
> Also - I h
Grats!
On 28 March 2013 19:57, Alex Huang wrote:
> The Podling Project Management Committee (PPMC) for Apache CloudStack has
> asked Animesh Chaturvedi to become a committer and we are pleased to
> announce that they have accepted.
>
>
>
> Being a committer enables easier contribution to the pr
Just a note that the previous two +1 votes are actually -1 votes in the
context of the DISCUSS topic.
I am also ready to cast my -1 vote.
On 28 March 2013 16:56, Kelceydamage@bbits wrote:
> +1 from me as well. It duplicates or segregates, neither of which seem
> like a positive change.
>
> -kd
Let the good times roll! Thanks Paul.
On 26 March 2013 17:36, Paul Davis wrote:
> Done.
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Here we go Paul: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-6063
> >
> >
> > On 21 March 2013 19:19, Paul Dav
u guys decide on a new format throw it in a JIRA ticket and I'll
> make the switch.
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Hey CloudStack devs,
> >
> > A bit of potential cross pollination here...
> >
> > I take it you've all not
e specification and the
> available variables for use here:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/docs/commit-emails.html
>
> If you guys decide on a new format throw it in a JIRA ticket and I'll
> make the switch.
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
really have users in the traditional sense)
>
>
> Kind Regards
> Giles
>
> D: +44 20 3603 0541 | M: +44 796 111 2055
> giles.sir...@shapeblue.com
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Noah Slater [mailto:nsla...@apache.org]
> Sent: 26 March 2013 09:51
> T
P.S. Chip, I would consider asking on general@hadoop.a.o about this...
On 21 March 2013 03:42, Chip Childers wrote:
> I've noticed that some of the projects separate discussions between dev
> and general administrative items via a general@ and a dev@ list. For
> example, the last email I sent
This proposal troubles me.
The dev list is supposed to be the single place you can monitor as a
contributor, and be assured that all development activity is happening
there. We should absolutely be minimising the other places people need to
check.
And also, I do not want to have to rely on other
Grats!
On 25 March 2013 15:25, Chip Childers wrote:
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack
> has asked Geoff Higginbottom to become a committer and we are pleased to
> announce that he has accepted.
>
> Being a committer allows many contributors to contribute more
> auto
Congrats!
On 25 March 2013 13:39, David Nalley wrote:
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked
> Hiroaki Kawai to become a committer and we are pleased to announce
> that they have accepted.
>
> Being a committer allows many contributors to contribute more
> auto
Quick follow up: this should be a step in the "adding a committer" process.
On 23 March 2013 13:54, Gavin Lee wrote:
> Hi, Chip & David
> I want to pick up some bugs and assign to myself, could you please
> help to give me such permission? This can avoid someone else working
> on the same issue
Sorted this for you, Gavin.
On 23 March 2013 13:54, Gavin Lee wrote:
> Hi, Chip & David
> I want to pick up some bugs and assign to myself, could you please
> help to give me such permission? This can avoid someone else working
> on the same issue.
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Gavin
>
--
NS
I am going to bring this up with Hadoop! I'll circle back here afterwards.
On 11 March 2013 02:01, Chip Childers wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 06:52:46PM +0000, Noah Slater wrote:
> > Devs,
> >
> > I was just reading through the by-laws we voted in (sorry, I am
1 - 100 of 102 matches
Mail list logo
