Yes, we do, and our yearly order even includes some certs for AOO :-)
I'll provide the contact of our volunteer cert manager, privately to the
PMC.
Cheers,
Greg Stein
Infrastructure Administrator, ASF
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:54 AM Peter Kovacs wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> Do we
status.apache.org reports services that are *down*, rather than individual
bugs/problems.
Thanks,
-g
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:03 AM, FR web forum wrote:
> I note that give you this information next time
> Why these outages are not reported in http://status.apache.org
>
>
> - Mail original
On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 11:49:44AM +0200, jan i wrote:
>...
> I have never thought or said this was about my person, it has nothing to do
> with my person.
> It has to do with the free will of a community versus discussions on
> private list outside the reach of the community.
As the AOO VP, it is
On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 02:17:01AM +0100, Simon Phipps wrote:
>...
> The report should stand as-is rather than be voided by a private request
> that seems to fly in the face of the public evidence.
Agreed, Simon. Jan "voided" the report after feedback from (3) individuals,
speaking as such. The on
On Sun, Apr 05, 2015 at 02:37:46AM +0200, jan i wrote:
>...
> Background is that after the report was submitted, a ASF Member (not board
> member and not part of our community)
> felt that I as new AOO chair, had formulated the report too negative and
> against the wishes of the community
"against
Hello everyone!
We have just made a release of serf 1.2.1. This fixes a number of
bugs, including a pretty bad bug in digest authentication on a single,
shared connection (issue 102). You can see all the changes at:
http://serf.googlecode.com/svn/tags/1.2.1/CHANGES
Download details are at:
ht
n the name of an active committer it would be
> > *immediately* detected. "WTF!? I didn't check that in!" But when done in
> > the name of an unactive committer it would be less likely to be noticed for
> > what it is. We might check twice, but tha
u, Apr 04, 2013 at 02:33:12PM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> > Also, let me say one more thing:
> >
> > This notion of creating divisions among committers ... it is "solving"
> > a problem that has never
a
non-existent issue. Net result: more problems.
Cheers,
-g
On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 05:59:31PM +, Greg Stein wrote:
> Speaking as one of those "old-hands", Dennis is absolutely spot-on.
>
> Partitions, barriers, sub-groups... I call those "divisive" mechanisms
>
Speaking as one of those "old-hands", Dennis is absolutely spot-on.
Partitions, barriers, sub-groups... I call those "divisive" mechanisms
which serve to divide the community. Such divisions are rarely needed.
As Andrea points out, in Subversion's 13 year history, we have only
*requested* people
Hi all,
I'm pleased to announce the serf 1.2.0 release!
This release contains many robustness fixes, especially around flaky
and problematic connections. The CHANGES file is located at:
http://serf.googlecode.com/svn/tags/1.2.0/CHANGES
Download details are at:
http://code.google.com/p/serf/
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 09:11:13AM -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 05:31:43PM -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
> >>> Obviously the changes to Calc
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 05:31:43PM -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
> Obviously the changes to Calc's POWER() function did not go well.
>
> IMHO, we need to better respect the rare but powerful veto option that
> committers have:
>
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#Veto
>
> When a committ i
13 matches
Mail list logo
