Hi,
> Just to stir the pot a little more. Should we add to the guidelines a sort
> of calendar and every year we are required to review our by laws again.
No need IMO they can be changed at any time and then voted in.
Thanks,
Justin
Just to stir the pot a little more. Should we add to the guidelines a sort
of calendar and every year we are required to review our by laws again.
During that time we also have to acknowledge chair at least as far as keep
/ change?
-Mark
Hi,
> I'm wondering if the board really does appoint the char as much as
> approves the PMC recommendation.
There are legal implications as the PMC chair is made an ASF officer. [1] I'd
be surprised if the PMC has the authority to remove an ASF officer.
> Because there should be some discussion
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> I'm wondering if the board really does appoint the char as much as
> approves the PMC recommendation. If we change chairs, we only provide
> notice and wait 72 hours. AFAIK, there is no action from the board
> required. This could just be anot
On 12/3/13 2:38 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> OK, but how does the PMC "oust" the current chair?
>The PMC would only have to oust the chair in extreme circumstances. I
>don't think the PMC actually can remove the chair as the chair is
>appointed by the board. In practise I would assume t
Hi,
> OK, but how does the PMC "oust" the current chair?
The PMC would only have to oust the chair in extreme circumstances. I don't
think the PMC actually can remove the chair as the chair is appointed by the
board. In practise I would assume that the process would be that a PMC member
(or mor
On 12/3/13 12:34 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>> should do a better job of explaining the details. The way the words are
>> currently written, I could just keep saying I want to renew every year
>> forever. It should not just be up to me to decide whether to continue,
>
>As keeps being pointed
- Alex is currently the chair and would volunteer to continue, but never
> has stated that he would aktually like to stay in that Position (It's more
> the others stating that they would want him to stay)
>
Actually, he has said he wanted to stay. A few times now.
-Nick
r 2013 08:16
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DRAFT] Apache Flex December 2013 Report
Hi,
IMO he's not clearly stated that he will stand for another year and yes the
choice is his. The board report seems to me to be a good place to state that.
When putting the guidelines together consensus was that t
> should do a better job of explaining the details. The way the words are
> currently written, I could just keep saying I want to renew every year
> forever. It should not just be up to me to decide whether to continue,
As keeps being pointed out to me: once you merit a position in the
Apache hi
On 12/2/13 11:46 PM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>> me to be a good place to state that. When putting the guidelines
>>together consensus was that the chair should
>> be for a year or reviewed every year.
>
>When I voted I took the guideline to mean: for at least a year and
>automatically extended b
The report is to notify the board of changes. Like with the committer
that declined: Greg indicated that since nothing changed, there didn't
need to be anything in the report.
EdB
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 8:48 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala
wrote:
> The question here is whether Alex should state that h
On 12/2/13 11:48 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>The question here is whether Alex should state that he is in fact
>continuing as the Chair in the board report. I don't see any controversy
>in that.
>Or do folks think that it is not necessary?
IMO, it isn't necessary. If we change chairs, a
The question here is whether Alex should state that he is in fact
continuing as the Chair in the board report. I don't see any controversy
in that.
Or do folks think that it is not necessary?
Thanks,
Om
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Erik de Bruin wrote:
> Alex: "... whether I should contin
> me to be a good place to state that. When putting the guidelines together
> consensus was that the chair should
> be for a year or reviewed every year.
When I voted I took the guideline to mean: for at least a year and
automatically extended by a year if the chair chose to stay on, unless
the P
Alex: "... whether I should continue if I'm willing to do so (which I am)."
Seems like a clear statement to me.
EdB
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> IMO he's not clearly stated that he will stand for another year and yes the
> choice is his. The board report see
Hi,
> Now, that same rule says you can call a vote to remove Alex from office and
> take the seat yourself
Let me assure everyone here that that is certainly not my intention. If that
was to happen there would need to be a vote by the PMC to elect someone as
chair and that may not be me and t
Hi,
IMO he's not clearly stated that he will stand for another year and yes the
choice is his. The board report seems to me to be a good place to state that.
When putting the guidelines together consensus was that the chair should be for
a year or reviewed every year. There may be other PMC mem
Justin, you're trying too hard. It feels like you're pushing Alex out.
You keep referring to our guidelines, so here is the relevant part
(emphasis mine):
"The term of chair is for one one year or UNTIL THEY RETIRE. After one
year THE CHAIR CAN ELECT TO STAND FOR ANOTHER YEAR or a vote by the
PMC
Hi,
> Hmm. Maybe there's need for some improvement to the guideline's wording.
> It really should only be my call to say if I don't want to continue in the
> role and up to the PMC with community input as to whether I should
> continue if I'm willing to do so (which I am).
Sorry but I have to di
On 12/2/13 2:37 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Actually the report would be a good time for Alex to say if he's
>continuing in the role or chair for a year or if we ask going to ask for
>other nominations and vote on a new chair.
Hmm. Maybe there's need for some improvement to the guidelin
Hi,
> I thought FlexUnit was in?
It's been donated but there no release.
Justin
Hi,
Actually the report would be a good time for Alex to say if he's continuing in
the role or chair for a year or if we ask going to ask for other nominations
and vote on a new chair.
Thanks,
Justin
The URLS under tradmarks are mistyped, but otherwise looks good on my side.
Once corrections are done and this is submitted, I'll write a wrap-up blog
post and get that online on the public side too.
-Nick
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> Sorry, updating subjectŠ
>
>
> On 1
I thought FlexUnit was in?
On 12/2/13 2:07 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>All looks good to me.
>
>Perhaps add that the FlexUnit and Swiz donation seems to have stalled?
>
>> -There were more than 3000 installs of 4.11.0 in the month since its
>>release.
>
>Currently at 3,656 installs of 4.1
Hi,
All looks good to me.
Perhaps add that the FlexUnit and Swiz donation seems to have stalled?
> -There were more than 3000 installs of 4.11.0 in the month since its release.
Currently at 3,656 installs of 4.11 and we've had 10,502 install of 4.10 since
it's release.
Thanks,
Justin
Perhaps a periodic culling of JIRA issues is in order - my (very small)
sampling suggests a noticable percentage of open issues could be closed
(eg: poor understanding of flex = assumption of bug).
On 02/12/2013 21:05, Alex Harui wrote:
In the past three months we've seen:
- Continued JIRA ac
Maybe it should be stated that Benoit has declined the offer
De : Alex Harui [aha...@adobe.com]
Envoyé : lundi 2 décembre 2013 22:05
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : [DRAFT] Apache Flex December 2013 Report
Sorry, updating subjectŠ
On 12/2/13 1:03 PM
Sorry, updating subjectŠ
On 12/2/13 1:03 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
Time for the next report. Please review and comment.
Thanks,
-Alex
-
Apache Flex is an application framework for easily building Flash-based
applications for mobile devices, the browser and desktop.
RELEASES
Apache
29 matches
Mail list logo
