We would like to include a software module currently hosted on
SourceForge into the codebase of the Apache FOP project. The developers
who wrote the module have indicated their willingness to do so
(actually are very keen to do this) and we have their ICLAs. What I
don't quite understand is the
Hi,
I am a newbie committer on the xmlbeanscxx project. As far as I can tell I
never received passwords for SSH or SVN. Can someone tell me how to go
about getting these?
Thanks,
Allen
[ ] +1 Release the binary as 4.0-M4
Regards,
Jonas
- Original Message -
From: "James Strachan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: ;
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 4:06 PM
Subject: [VOTE] approve a milestone release of ActiveMQ?
On the developer list
/me removes Zimbra hat.
For the past several years, I've wanted to donate my HTML
parser code built on Xerces-J to the Xerces project. It is
written using the Xerces Native Interface and provides HTML
parsing with XML APIs.
When I mentioned donating the code to the project, it was
suggested that
On Wednesday 01 February 2006 20:40, Leo Simons wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 08:05:01PM +0800, Manuel Mall wrote:
> > We would like to include a software module currently hosted on
> > SourceForge into the codebase of the Apache FOP project. The
> > developers who wrote the module have indicate
I was told this didn't show up on the archives so I'm sending it again.
Allen
-Original Message-
From: Allen Brookes
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 7:12 AM
To: 'general@incubator.apache.org'
Subject: SSH and SVN passwords
Hi,
I am a newbie committer on the xmlbeanscxx proj
I going to blame our lawyers for this. (That's my story and I'm stickn' to it!
:)
Let's pause this thread and level set on this after Jim confirms the faxes that
I sent today and I update the pages that Noel has pointed out.
Regards,
Alan
--Original Message--
From: Noel J. Bergman
[ ] +1 Release the binary as 4.0-M4
On the developer list the committers voted to create a milestone
release of ActiveMQ...
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-activemq-dev/
200512.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
then the committers voted to approve the distro
http://mail-archives.apach
Should have sent this email a much earlier as we voted quite some
time ago. Anyway,
OpenEJB has been proposed as a subproject of Geronimo. See the
proposal here:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenEjbProposal
The Geronimo project has voted to be the sponsor of the OpenEJB.
The vot
I'm trying to sort out the issues here. As I understand Sybase wants
to donate the code and keep working on it in a community larger than
the Sybase developers working on it :-)
It seems to me that depending where the code comes into Apache
different groups of people get to work on it from
On 2/2/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> robert burrell donkin wrote:
> > Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
> > > allow automated downloads by Maven? I have an issue with that,
> > > since it could allow people to use the code without knowing
> > > that it is in the Incubator, but more to th
I'm going to remove my original -1 from this thread and vote +1 for it.
My apologies for helping to create this major ruckus. This type of
heated discussion does not help build communities and cross community
interactions that would benefit all of us in many ways. That is
especially so because thi
Re: Both Sam and Brett
I like this. I like this a lot.
-Brian
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greg Wilkins wrote:
I disagree that all contributions must go via the incubator. This is
clearly within the scope of servicemix and there is no need to
develope a community around this code.
All code contributions MUST be vetted by the incubator PMC. Only a PMC is
authorized by the board to
Brett Porter wrote:
> On 2/4/06, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>This discussion would be a lot easier if it were of the form "here's
>>code that I would like to see at the ASF, and I'd like to participate
>>and make use of it in the following manner... independent of where the
>>code ends
It's great that you already have experience
with the Zimbra toolkit and that you want to
help with the new Kabuki project. Just give us
a little time to get all the infrastructure
stuff ready.
As soon as we get the mailing lists working,
subscribe to those and join in on the Kabuki
discussions. T
On 1/31/2006 8:23 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Noel J. Bergman wrote, On 1/31/2006 7:27 PM:
Alan,
Could you folks turn up some additional Mentors? We have not adopted
a formal policy to require more than one --- yet --- but I'd like to
see more than one.
Sure, good idea.
The only perso
On 2/4/06, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This discussion would be a lot easier if it were of the form "here's
> code that I would like to see at the ASF, and I'd like to participate
> and make use of it in the following manner... independent of where the
> code ends up".
>
> But as it stand
*IF* that is the objective, then the correct way is to follow the
Apache Incubator process(es) draw up a proposal, name *ALL* the
committers in servicemix who are willing to contribute, add your own
team names, post the proposal to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list.
Ask for more people to join, Pr
Thanks!
I'm a little buried at the moment, too, but first
thing next week I'll start getting the mailing lists
and source repo ready for the Kabuki project. Once
we have that going, then we can really get started
on design discussions and the like. :)
- Original Message -
From: Geir Mag
The dependency on Axis should be removed. It's the result of a couple lines
of dead code. BPEL 2.0 is an objective.
The discussion over where the contribution lands is one of the most
important aspects of the process. Too narrow a scope and the project could
fail to get critical mass, too wide
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Are there risks to making this a TLP, i.e. do we know that there will be
> enough traction to get it out of the incubator on its own? Wouldn't it
> make sense to incubate it in an existing project and if the community
> grows, graduated it to a TLP? I think that we've se
Cc'ing the incubator list since Dims is no longer on the Geronimo and
ServiceMix lists.
Regards,
Alan
On 2/3/2006 2:05 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
Holy crap! What a mess this thread is! I'm not used to being like
the cool voice of reason. :)
For my 2 cents, a JBI container without BPEL is a
Are there risks to making this a TLP, i.e. do we know that there will be
enough traction to get it out of the incubator on its own? Wouldn't it
make sense to incubate it in an existing project and if the community
grows, graduated it to a TLP? I think that we've seen many TLP projects
strugg
I realize this is late, but I've been momentarily buried, and because I
had also asked that Sam restart the vote, I'd like to symbolically add
my +1 to the proposal.
geir
Sam Ruby wrote:
Even though it is only symbolic at this point, I will express my +1 on
this proposal.
Without delving int
I was determined to stay of this, but alas! i could resist asking this:
Would you be ok to having a stand alone project with committers from
servicemix, your team, people from other backgrounds (could be
existing ws committers) working on this code base, bring it up to say
BPEL 2.0 from BPEL1.1, u
Dims, I'll take Cory off the hook since he was acting in good faith on
behalf of Sybase :-).
As we are learning, there are a variety of ways to work within the Apache
process as long as the community is supportive. From the Sybase
perspective, we are interested in working with a vibrant community
I do agree with your point James, communities built around a narrow
scope are harder to grow and attracting new commiters can become
hazardous. However my feeling is that the failure of Agila in
attracting new committers (for now) is mostly due to a lack of public
exposure and not really to BPEL ha
On 2/3/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> community inside a single project with one overall aim (Geronimo for
> J2EE, ServiceMix for JBI, Jakarta Commons / WS Commons for utility
> code etc) than to have lots of smaller projects.
Is ServiceMix intended to be a TLP, or will it continu
On 3 Feb 2006, at 16:13, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Incidentally its worth looking at other projects at Apache like Agila
and various projects on http://ws.apache.org like EWS, Mirae, Muse,
WSRF, TSIK etc which are kinda quiet, some near dormant. Making
projects too small and too granular can
Ken,
I apologize!!! it's just like hitting your head on a brick wall and
going around in circles.
James,
I hereby remove my -1 on the contrib to ServiceMix. Go ahead and do
anything you want, however you want, i don't care anymore. If Ken or
Noel or any other Geronimo or Incubator PMC member wants
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Strachan wrote:
>
> The TM is in a single download-able jar all by itself; so you can
> download only what you need. e.g. here's the latest snapshot of just
> the transaction manager...
>
> We use the same approach in ServiceMix; we make lo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Just what do you define the community as? ws-folks don't count? what
> mentor says does not count? existing Agila folks don't count? Looks
> like the definition of community is everyone who says yes to you and
> everyone else
On 3 Feb 2006, at 15:38, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Strachan wrote:
To use an analogy from Geronimo. You can reuse the Transaction
Manager inside Geronimo by itself without anything else from
Geronimo. Everything developed within the Geron
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Strachan wrote:
>
> To use an analogy from Geronimo. You can reuse the Transaction
> Manager inside Geronimo by itself without anything else from
> Geronimo. Everything developed within the Geronimo PMC is modular;
> you can use what you l
Just what do you define the community as? ws-folks don't count? what
mentor says does not count? existing Agila folks don't count? Looks
like the definition of community is everyone who says yes to you and
everyone else is not part of the community?
Part of the incubation process is to to generate
On 3 Feb 2006, at 15:05, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Why can't you treat an orchestration engine like a component like the
way you treat Axis or XFire? Why does the code have to live within
ServiceMix? Lot of us want a BPEL engine, we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Why can't you treat an orchestration engine like a component like the
> way you treat Axis or XFire? Why does the code have to live within
> ServiceMix? Lot of us want a BPEL engine, we don't want a JBI
> container. The code c
Then by all means go ahead with a proposal to the Geronimo PMC asking
to start a new incubation project for BPEL as you say that there is
enough people to work on it. Not a backdoor "patch" to ServiceMix.
BPEL can be used standalone and BPEL was not in scope of ServiceMix. A
BPEL JBI Component is n
I was speaking with my Geronimo PMC hat on thinking in general about
projects within the Geronimo PMC.
James
On 3 Feb 2006, at 14:26, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
James,
you can make those decisions when ServiceMix is a TLP of its own.
Right now it's not.
thanks,
dims
On 2/3/06, James Strachan
James,
you can make those decisions when ServiceMix is a TLP of its own.
Right now it's not.
thanks,
dims
On 2/3/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3 Feb 2006, at 13:23, James Strachan wrote:
> > On 3 Feb 2006, at 13:02, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> >> So, bottom line, Please draw u
On 3 Feb 2006, at 13:23, James Strachan wrote:
On 3 Feb 2006, at 13:02, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
So, bottom line, Please draw up a new proposal for a separate
project.
So here's the thing; no-one involved (the folks donating the code
and the committers on the ServiceMix project) want a new p
Actually I'm a bit surprised by the proposal of making the BPEL engine
part of ServiceMix as well. ESBs and orchestration engines work pretty
well with each other, that's agreed, but so do Tomcat and Struts.
I'm working on Agila BPEL and I agree that the Agila community isn't
the most active aroun
could u help move all the projects to m2? all i need is a link from
http://ws.apache.org/commons/ to http://ws.apache.org/commons/util/
-- dims
On 2/3/06, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>
> > Maven-ized the commons projects just a bit, just enough for the pag
James,
"Why don't you join the Agila project then?" is not the right
attitude. we are trying to be constructive.
thanks,
-- dims
On 2/3/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3 Feb 2006, at 13:45, Paul Fremantle wrote:
> > James
> >
> > I'm sure you want a single strong community aro
Why can't you treat an orchestration engine like a component like the
way you treat Axis or XFire? Why does the code have to live within
ServiceMix? Lot of us want a BPEL engine, we don't want a JBI
container. The code coming in does exactly that, it is a BPEL engine
and has no relation to JBI or J
On 3 Feb 2006, at 13:45, Paul Fremantle wrote:
James
I'm sure you want a single strong community around JBI. But a BPEL
is a
specification that is completely independent of JBI and indeed of
Java.
You're talking about the BPEL XML language; I'm talking about a Java
based orchestration en
James
I'm sure you want a single strong community around JBI. But a BPEL is a
specification that is completely independent of JBI and indeed of Java.
If you make the argument that everything that can be potentially used as a
JBI component is part of ServiceMix then you pretty much include every pa
On 3 Feb 2006, at 13:02, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
James,
There are 2 problems:
- As a Geronimo PMC member i feel a BPEL implemenation is out-of-scope
of what i voted for when i +1'ed incubation for ServiceMix.
The proposal for ServiceMix clearly says...
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ServiceM
On 2 Feb 2006, at 20:51, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
James Strachan wrote:
Given it fits nicely with the existing ServiceMix incubation
proposal I see no need for a new proposal for a donation of
code to an existing incubating project.
We don't start to incubate a chicken, and then import a barnya
Hi,
I would like to get involved and contribute to this project as I am
currently developing applications using the Zimbra Ajax Toolkit.
Please let me know how I can get involved with the project.
Regards,
Lakmal
-
To unsubs
Hello,
I am working for a company called THINCkube, and we are developing a
product that is using the Zimbra Ajax toolkit.
Sanjiva, mentioned about this new project idea, which I found quite
interesting.
I would like to know how I can contribute to this project.
Thanks,
Buddhika
-
James,
There are 2 problems:
- As a Geronimo PMC member i feel a BPEL implemenation is out-of-scope
of what i voted for when i +1'ed incubation for ServiceMix. I don't
like what's happening and the way you are doing it.
- Secondly, there just isnt enough information to make a decision one
way or a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James Strachan wrote:
> On 3 Feb 2006, at 09:18, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
>
>>Absolutely -1: The first time I ever saw any of this topic was
>>Wed, 1 Feb 2006 12:20:32 -0700 (Thu, 01:20 LKT)
>>and now at
>>Thu, 2 Feb 2006 16:22:28 + (22:22 LKT
54 matches
Mail list logo
