On 30 December 2011 15:26, Luciano Resende wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
>> I did try, before sending the below mail, with the the accounts I have:
>>
>> Ross DOT gardler AT gmail.com
>>
>> I don't see any admin options.
>>
>
> Using your gmail account mentioned
Hi Shane,
Thanks for the reply. In the end I just went with org.apacheextras.*
To be honest, I think it would have been OK IMHO to use org.apache.*
(though I know not everyone shares that opinion) but as I said, I don't
directly have a voice in setting that type of policy. If, however, someday
I
Neat, I took a mental vacation on this issue, and it's mostly done when
I come back to the thread!
Trademarks and brand are primarily about the primary name of a product,
not classnames or package names. So unless your project is called
org.apache.SuperThing on the home page, the package name
Hey Nóirín et al.,
Happy New Year! I've went ahead and updated my patch
on COMDEV-65 [1] with information on the org.apacheextras
namespace and with the suggestion to get further information
from the responsible Project Management Committees and
from ComDev PMC in general. I also changed Project C
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 31, 2011 3:07 PM, "Benson Margulies" wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Dec 2011, Benson Margulies wrote:
> >>
> >> Second, I wonder about the proposed governance and logic of this who
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Dec 2011, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>
>> Second, I wonder about the proposed governance and logic of this whole
>> 'java package id rules' business. Here's a scenario: someone from
>> outside Apache fills out the form, creates a proje
On Fri, 30 Dec 2011, Benson Margulies wrote:
Second, I wonder about the proposed governance and logic of this whole
'java package id rules' business. Here's a scenario: someone from
outside Apache fills out the form, creates a project, and *forks some
Apache project into it.* Bingo, 'org.apache.*
Hey Benson,
On Dec 30, 2011, at 8:25 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> So, this leaves me with two questions: could comdev write a less
> comprehensive set of verbs here within the existing board@ mandate?
> And is there any point to a discussion on board@ about the starting
> point of all this: comm
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Benson,
>
> You honed in on PRECISELY the 2 points I was trying to make.
> Thanks for making them so succinctly. One thing I will comment
> on explicitly (read below):
>
> On Dec 30, 2011, at 7:52 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
>
>>
Benson,
You honed in on PRECISELY the 2 points I was trying to make.
Thanks for making them so succinctly. One thing I will comment
on explicitly (read below):
On Dec 30, 2011, at 7:52 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> There are two aspects of this situation that I want to highlight:
>
> First, the
Hey Ross,
On Dec 30, 2011, at 3:21 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 30 December 2011 08:21, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>> wrote:
>>> I'm also of the mindset that the PMC should be the ones saying
>
> ...
>
>>> if they are OK with my oodt-p
On Dec 30, 2011, at 3:11 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 29 December 2011 20:29, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Ap
Hey Ross,
On Dec 30, 2011, at 2:27 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> [...snip...]
> Nothing in that quote says "using Apache marks", furthermore later sections
> prohibit the use of or marks. Therefore it would be a loophole if those
> clauses were not there. The clauses in our terms need to be read in th
There are two aspects of this situation that I want to highlight:
First, there's a policy tension at the heart of the whole Apache
Extras concept that has me puzzled.
I could point to a raft of messages from board members expressing
extremely vehement views in opposition to 'circumventing license
Hey Noirin,
On Dec 30, 2011, at 12:21 AM, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
> Chris,
>
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>> Hey Guys,
>>
>> I was talking with Greg, and I think I'm OK with org.apacheextras as
>> the namespace.
>
> Thanks for your patience :-) I wasn't
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> I did try, before sending the below mail, with the the accounts I have:
>
> rgard...@opendirective.com
> rgard...@apache.org
> ross.gard...@gmail.com
>
> I don't see any admin options.
Hm you should have?
http://code.google.com/a/apache-extra
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> I did try, before sending the below mail, with the the accounts I have:
>
> Ross DOT gardler AT gmail.com
>
> I don't see any admin options.
>
Using your gmail account mentioned above, go to the following link
http://code.google.com/a/apache
On 29 December 2011 20:23, Mark Struberg wrote:
...
> Would it be possible to have it under the package org.apacheextras ?
That's a good suggestion. We'd need to check with trademarks (cc'd) but
personally I think this would be OK.
CONTEXT for trademarks: a PMC wants to put some code on apache
I did try, before sending the below mail, with the the accounts I have:
rgard...@opendirective.com
rgard...@apache.org
ross.gard...@gmail.com
I don't see any admin options.
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 30, 2011 3:11 PM, "Luciano Resende" wrote:
> On Fri
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 3:14 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> On 29 December 2011 20:50, Mark Struberg wrote:
>>> they include runtime dependencies (via Maven2) on LGPL code.
>> Basically I like the apacheextras idea, but it _must_ be made clear > that
>> apacheextras has it's own rules which are _not_
On 30 December 2011 08:21, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
> wrote:
>> I'm also of the mindset that the PMC should be the ones saying
...
>> if they are OK with my oodt-pushpull-plugins Extras name and
>> to me it should be fine if the PMC is
On 29 December 2011 20:50, Mark Struberg wrote:
>> they include runtime dependencies (via Maven2) on LGPL code.
> Basically I like the apacheextras idea, but it _must_ be made clear > that
> apacheextras has it's own rules which are _not_ ASF business.
> The current http://apacheextras.org is rea
On 29 December 2011 20:29, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>>> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
>>> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ?
>>
>> But that's exactly the point! It is NOT AL
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 29, 2011 7:16 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
> Hey Mike,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I get the analogy. More comments below.
>
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> >
Chris,
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hey Guys,
>
> I was talking with Greg, and I think I'm OK with org.apacheextras as
> the namespace.
Thanks for your patience :-) I wasn't trying to discount your
proposals, and I appreciate that you'd created a patch--I w
BTW, I just updated the code at [1] to use org.apacheextras and also
updated the description of the project to make it clear that it's not Apache
releases nor is it Apache code.
Cheers,
Chris
[1] http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/oodt-pushpull-plugins/
On Dec 29, 2011, at 10:30 PM, M
Hey Guys,
I was talking with Greg, and I think I'm OK with org.apacheextras as
the namespace.
It sounds like Noirin thought that was cool and so did Mark S.
Are folks here on ComDev cool with that namespace for our Extras
projects? If so, I'll update my COMDEV-65 patch with docs stating that
and
Hi Nóirín,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 9:21 PM, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
>>
>> Mark Struberg had another concrete suggestion: kudos to him for proposing
>> using
>> org.apachextras.oodt (implied). I could live with that, but don't believe I
>> (or anyone else)
>> should have to.
>>
>
> I strongly pref
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
>
> No, that's not what I'm proposing. I'm proposing to use Apache Extras, a
> supposedly sanctioned
> "associated" and not "external" effort that supposedly is amenable (per its
> own explanation page
> that I've cited several tim
Hi Dennis,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 5:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Funny, your conclusion is exactly contrary to my reasoning.
>
> It strikes me that you are talking about extending the decentralized
> governance of the org.apache.oodt.* namespace (i.e., the ability to add
> branches and ne
: dev@community.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
Hey Dennis,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Thanks Chris,
>
> Just one caution. I mentioned authority over namespaces, not authority over
> Apache Extras. The question is what const
Hey Christian,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:49 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> [...snip...]
>>
>> To avoid that nuclear option, I proposed 2 concrete suggestions and even
>> volunteered
>> to work up a patch that implements the one with less sweeping change. IOW, I
>> offered to put my money where m
Hey Dennis,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Thanks Chris,
>
> Just one caution. I mentioned authority over namespaces, not authority over
> Apache Extras. The question is what constitutes authorized use of additions
> to the org.apache.* hierarchy for namespaces. O
org.apache.community.* and be reluctant to delegate that beyond their
subordinate hierarchy.)
-Original Message-
From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [mailto:chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov]
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 12:45
To: dev@community.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Subject: Re: Apache
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hey Christian,
>
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
Extras instead o
nity.apache.org" ; Mark Struberg
>
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>
>>> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then
l solution. (The mapping
of "-" to "_" is part of the Java specification.)
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Mark Struberg [mailto:strub...@yahoo.de]
Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 12:24
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
> If you a
Hi Dennis,
Thanks for replying, comments below:
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>
> (2) for a conforming implementation of a type that is defined by an Apache
> project
This is the situation that the OODT PushPull plugins fall into.
>
> This is no different than if the
Hey Christian,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>>> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
>>> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ?
>>
>> But that's exactly the
nsed sources but also others.
Yeah, precisely. Thanks for getting what I was saying Mark!
Cheers,
Chris
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: Luciano Resende
>> To: dev@community.apache.org
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:13 PM
>> Subj
Message -
>> From: Luciano Resende
>> To: dev@community.apache.org
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>> wrote:
>>>
ASF and apacheextras might not only contain ALv2 licensed
sources but also others.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
> From: Luciano Resende
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:13 PM
> Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
&
Hi Luciano,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
>>
>> Who asked to release the code? I just want an SVN to throw the code up at.
>> If you look at oodt-pushpull-plugins [1], the LICENSE.txt file is ALv2. The
>> code
>> we wrote (in Java) is ALv2. The code includes a runtime Mav
org
Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
Hey Mike,
Thanks for your reply. I get the analogy. More comments below.
On Dec 29, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> [...snip...]
> You, as an ASF member and PMC chair are equivalent to the employee in
> this scenario. Even though you
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> (removing community@ from the CC list; aren't we trying to kill that thread?)
>
> Hi Ross,
>
> Thanks for replying. Comments below:
>
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> [...snip...]
>
>> >
>> > It's my understan
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> I don't know if I'm subscribed to dev@community, so any future replies
> may not reach me.
>
> Let me give you what I think is an equivalent analogy.
>
> Assume Microsoft sets up a community hosting site for projects related
> to Microso
(removing community@ from the CC list; aren't we trying to kill that thread?)
Hi Ross,
Thanks for replying. Comments below:
On Dec 29, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
[...snip...]
> >
> > It's my understanding that anyone can start up a project at Apache Extras,
> > in which case, if tha
I don't know if I'm subscribed to dev@community, so any future replies
may not reach me.
Let me give you what I think is an equivalent analogy.
Assume Microsoft sets up a community hosting site for projects related
to Microsoft products.
Assume you are an employee of Microsoft.
Assume that Micr
Hey Mike,
Thanks for your reply. I get the analogy. More comments below.
On Dec 29, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> [...snip...]
> You, as an ASF member and PMC chair are equivalent to the employee in
> this scenario. Even though you are an ASF member or PMC chair, you
> do not ha
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 29, 2011 6:33 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
> (cc'ing dev@community and setting reply-to: header so that replies
> go there)
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> First off, thanks for replying. Comments inl
(cc'ing dev@community and setting reply-to: header so that replies
go there)
Hi Mike,
First off, thanks for replying. Comments inline below:
On Dec 29, 2011, at 6:33 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> I am not an official Apache member, but here's my take on it.
>
> The Extras project area is for
51 matches
Mail list logo
