> 6 BEA-employed committers + 5 independent committers
> I think there is definitely sufficient community interest to keep the
> project going; however, it would probably move a lot slower if BEA
> were to drop XMLBeans today.
Understanding that "BEA has absolutely no intention of dropping suppor
Leo Simons wrote:
> Noel, have your concerns been addressed?
I think so. They've been addressed in that they've been discussed. Steven
has been watching Lenya closely, particularly recently, and seems convinced
that there has been a sea change in that community. Whether or not it
sticks remains
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> I think the problem we are faced with is determining how to define
> a "healthy community" when used as a criterion for exiting the
> incubator.
I'm perfectly comfortable with adopting Justice Stewart's famous comment
when it comes to defining a healthy ASF community, rathe
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
...
Sounds like we're all in agreement here (at least all those who have
posted to the list in the last few days).
I'm happy to be in 'violent' and silent agreement :-)
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(di
Martin,
> Fine to hear that some interest is there!
So far, I have heard from Dain Sundstrom (Geronimo) and James Holmes
(Struts) that they are interested in participating on a MyFaces PPMC. I
expect we'll hear from others, and ought to be able to decide this week
about Incubation.
---
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > Not quite. The PPMC is a subgroup officially established by the
> > incubator PMC, containing a named list of individuals who have
> > agreed to participate on the PPMC.
>
> I think we need to make its status as an official subgroup of the
> incubat
Roy T. Fielding wrote on Monday, June 14, 2004 3:40 PM:
>> Personally, I'd like to see one or two quantitative rules (such as
>> one about independent committers to allow for vetoes) and then leave
>> the rest up to a voting body that will evaluate graduation against
>> some general guidelines. I
Leo Simons wrote:
> Shall we change the policy docs then?
> Instead of
>"No single organization supplies more than 50% of the active
>committers (must be at least 3 independent committers)"
> we make that
> "The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor
>(there's sever
Leo Simons wrote on Monday, June 14, 2004 4:01 PM:
> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> The more quantitative it is, the more a new project can know what
>> they have ahead of them and the less familiarity with the project's
>> community is required to cast an informed vote on graduation (just
>> look up the
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
The more quantitative it is, the more a new project can know what they
have ahead of them and the less familiarity with the project's community
is required to cast an informed vote on graduation (just look up the
numbers).
I know an example or two of unhealthy communites where
Frankly: it is because of this apparent shift in attitude that I'm
feeling Lenya is finally getting ready.
yeah, baby, yeah! Let's add checkmarks next to:
# Demonstrate ability to tolerate and resolve conflict within the
community.
# Release plans are developed and excuted in public by the
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
I have no idea where that 50% stuff came from.
me neither! But I figure it was added for /some/ reason :-D
IMO, there ought to be a sufficient independent community such that
if commercial in
Personally, I'd like to see one or two quantitative rules (such as one
about independent committers to allow for vetoes) and then leave the
rest
up to a voting body that will evaluate graduation against some general
guidelines. I also think the voting body should be the PPMC, which is
made up of
Noel J. Bergman wrote on Monday, June 14, 2004 12:14 PM:
> Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>> Leo Simons wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> I have no idea where that 50% stuff came from.
me neither! But I figure it was added for /some/ reason :-D
>>>
>>> IMO, ther
Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Leo Simons wrote:
> > > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > > I have no idea where that 50% stuff came from.
> > >
> > > me neither! But I figure it was added for /some/ reason :-D
> >
> > IMO, there ought to be a sufficient independent community such that
Bruce Snyder wrote:
> Bill Dudney and I were talking about this back in March and I said
> that it might be a good subproject for Geronimo. Any opinions?
The same might be said of being a sub-project in Jakarta, Struts or Portals.
I'm not particularly concerned with where it ends up, or if it beco
> Fine to hear that some interest is there!
Seems like it. :-) We're just in the process of lining up some folks who
would be working with you to help in the Incubation process.
Meanwhile, can you provide some information about your Community? Is it
largely independent developers? Is there a
This one time, at band camp, Jim Jagielski said:
JJ>On Jun 13, 2004, at 2:23 PM, Tim O'Brien wrote:
JJ>
JJ>> I'm fairly certain there is sufficient interest for this, but there
JJ>> would
JJ>> need to be a sponsoring entity, champion, and mentor. I don't think
JJ>> this
JJ>> would be a problem,
On Jun 14, 2004, at 7:05 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Jun 13, 2004, at 2:23 PM, Tim O'Brien wrote:
I'm fairly certain there is sufficient interest for this, but there
would
need to be a sponsoring entity, champion, and mentor. I don't think
this
would be a problem, but you should take a look at t
Steven Noels wrote:
On 14 Jun 2004, at 14:29, Michael Wechner wrote:
I am not sure about this. I think it would be better if people
would view "us" as individuals. I try to do so in the case
of other projects with various companies involved, and I think
it works well, at least for myself.
I unders
On 14 Jun 2004, at 14:29, Michael Wechner wrote:
I am not sure about this. I think it would be better if people
would view "us" as individuals. I try to do so in the case
of other projects with various companies involved, and I think
it works well, at least for myself.
I understand your subtle hint
On Jun 13, 2004, at 2:23 PM, Tim O'Brien wrote:
I'm fairly certain there is sufficient interest for this, but there
would
need to be a sponsoring entity, champion, and mentor. I don't think
this
would be a problem, but you should take a look at the "Roles and
Responsibilities" page.
MyFaces is
On Jun 13, 2004, at 7:45 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
Roy T. Fielding wrote on Friday, June 11, 2004 2:24 PM:
I have no idea where that 50% stuff came from.
me neither! But I figure it was added for /some/ reason :-D
hmm. Do you have an opinion?
IMO, there ought to be a sufficient
Gregor J. Rothfuss wrote:
...
there are still some old files i could not remove:
-bash-2.05b$ pwd
/www/www.apache.org/dist/cocoon/lenya
-bash-2.05b$ ls -la legal/
total 32
drwxr-xr-x 2 nicolaken cocoon512 Sep 17 2003 .
drwxrwxr-x 6 gregor cocoon512 Jun 14 05:17 ..
-rw-r--r-- 1 nico
Andreas Hartmann wrote:
> Bad code makes good communities.
For those who are not subscribed to lenya-dev: Not everyone there does agree
with that view (I do not).
Andreas
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additio
Rolf Kulemann wrote:
1.) There exists (illegal) content under
http://www.apache.org/dist/cocoon/lenya/ . The files need to be proven
by the incubators or removed iirc . I think the later one is in order.
removed
re 1.): is it ok to remove the files? Have I got access rights to do so?
yes you do. us
Leo Simons wrote:
As a general note I would like to say, that future concerns should be
addressed to individuals and not to Wyona as a company.
Well in some cases it /is/ relevant that a large part of lenya
individuals are wyona employees. While its a task of lenya (not
individuals there; the r
On Sat, 2004-06-12 at 11:04, Rolf Kulemann wrote:
> Hello Lenya Mentors and Incubators,
>
> the Lenya community wants to perform a release (while being under
> incubation).
>
> With this mail the community wants to carry out (1) the formal request
> for the endorsement of our mentors, Stefano and
Steven Noels wrote:
On 14 Jun 2004, at 12:02, Michael Wechner wrote:
Of course not, and I hope I've been careful enough to talk only from
my own private perception - something I can and will not change even
if I know the people behind the voices on the mailing lists.
I think it's necessary that
Steven Noels wrote:
I think it is only decent to expect that developers of incubating
projects are subscribed to the incubator mailing list and have an
interest in the overall incubation process.
agreed
Part of the little things I did during this incubation is proxying
back- and forward, and th
On 14 Jun 2004, at 13:43, Leo Simons wrote:
Also I think it would be of great help if issues are being sent to
the Lenya
community directly and or the individuals involved.
duly noted, and lenya-dev added back to CC list. Guys, you may have
missed some useful bits of info. Please go read recent
Michael Wechner wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
In this case, Noel has raised some perfectly valid concerns about
files living on http://www.apache.org/dist/ without a PMC putting them
there (which is a *big thing*, for legal and other reasons). If I were
lenya, I wouldn't complain about constraints,
On 14 Jun 2004, at 12:02, Michael Wechner wrote:
Steven Noels wrote:
Lenya has an awkward history IMHO. It has been force-fed into the
bowls of the ASF upon the idea that a community was more important
than code, and because of pet-peeves of people: the ASF needed a CMS
project, and Lenya would
On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 01:14, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Steven,
>
> I am having some difficulty reconciling some of your comments, so please
> take the time to clarify for my (and judging from Gianugo Rabellino's
> comments, that of others) benefit.
>
> Fair warning: this message is likely to come
On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 02:00, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Rolf Kulemann wrote:
> > Noel J. Bergman asked:
> > > What is the current status of the IP and community? What is keeping
> > > Lenya in incubation?
> >
> > Good question, afaics nothing since Lenya full fills all incubation
> > rules BUT the u
Leo Simons wrote:
In this case, Noel has raised some perfectly valid concerns about
files living on http://www.apache.org/dist/ without a PMC putting them
there (which is a *big thing*, for legal and other reasons). If I were
lenya, I wouldn't complain about constraints, but just address those
Steven Noels wrote:
Lenya has an awkward history IMHO. It has been force-fed into the
bowls of the ASF upon the idea that a community was more important
than code, and because of pet-peeves of people: the ASF needed a CMS
project, and Lenya would be a community seed for that - regardless of
the
Hi Andreas!
Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
I think that it should be the task of the Apache Incubator to help exiting the
incubator. It should not try to artificially block releases.
actually, the task of the incubator is to help projects and people find
their place in the asf whilst simultaneously prote
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Rolf Kulemann wrote:
Noel J. Bergman asked:
What is the current status of the IP and community? What is keeping
Lenya in incubation?
Good question, afaics nothing since Lenya full fills all incubation
rules BUT the u2date status file :)
I think after the 1.2 r
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
So please explain why we should have a incubator release while there are still
so many questions regarding the viability of the community?
IMHO lenya making this release (according to the rules set for it) is
part of an ongoing effort by lenya to make the community more "via
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
[...]
Great, but I'm still trying to
understand why there is a need to put out a distribution rather than put all
of the energy into helping Lenya conclude incubation and then release.
IMHO a Lenya release should be pushed out as quickly as possible,
*including bugs*. Bad
On 14 Jun 2004, at 01:14, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I am having some difficulty reconciling some of your comments, so
please
take the time to clarify for my (and judging from Gianugo Rabellino's
comments, that of others) benefit.
I gather so, and I think I might have collapsed too many orthogonal
re
Fine to hear that some interest is there!
I am sure that we can handle the license-issue somehow, as soon as this is necessary.
Best regards,
Martin
-Original Message-
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 12:29 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Marinschek
Noel J. Bergman wrote on Sunday, June 13, 2004 4:31 PM:
> Cliff Schmidt wrote:
>> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>>> Leo Simons wrote:
[is the rule that a project just needs 3 independent committers, or
is there an additional rule that no more than 50% of the committers
must be part of a si
44 matches
Mail list logo
