On 3/13/07, Martin Sebor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm wondering if anyone else has noticed the problem noted in
INFRA-1185 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-1185),
namely that not all posts appear in our browsable archives.
Weird. I tossed the mod_mbox index for that month and rec
On 3/13/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes. Tomorrow was the "official" end date for getting the reports in. I
have taken a quick glance through, which is why I posted a reminder for the
projects that have more work to do.
In all likelihood, the board meeting is getting pushed
J Aaron Farr wrote:
> And Triple Soup is missing, but nothing has happened with that podling
yet.
Well, not *nothing*. I see code in SVN, for example. Please add it to the
roster.
> do we want PMC members to sign off on the reports like last month?
Yes. Tomorrow was the "official" end date f
legal-discuss: Any chance someone could comment on this that has access to
the TCK license?
Many thanks,
- Dan
On 3/13/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bozhong Lin wrote:
> we would like to cut 2.0 release sooner without fully passing
> JAX-WS TCK, and plan to push JAX-WS TCK t
On Mar 13, 2007, at 6:53 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Mar 13, 2007, at 3:46 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the source and binary kernel releases look identical
zip errors in jars unpackaged from kernel-2.0-alpha-incubating.zip:
* core/src/test/resources/deployables/sample-calculator.jar
* cor
On Mar 13, 2007, at 3:46 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
the source and binary kernel releases look identical
zip errors in jars unpackaged from kernel-2.0-alpha-incubating.zip:
* core/src/test/resources/deployables/sample-calculator.jar
* core/src/test/resources/repository/sample-calculator.ja
"Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> This month's ASF Board reports should be written up on the wiki at
>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/March2007
>
> River and Woden are not nearly detailed enough. We need status, issues
> required for graduation, etc. Not just the project descri
On 3/13/07, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The Tuscany community recently voted to release version 2.0-alpha-
incubating of the Kernel for SCA Java.
[VOTE] to release the kernel modules
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-tuscany-dev/200703.mbox/%
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[VOTE] to r
I've taken care of this.
thanks,
dims
On 3/7/07, Paul McMahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As a member of the Geronimo PMC I have been helping facilitate the J2G
code contribution into the Geronimo project. You can find the
relevant discussion at : http://tinyurl.com/3dk32f
Dims kindly helped
On 3/9/07, Rick McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The Yoko community voted on and has approved a proposal to release Yoko
Milestone 2.
Please vote by 6 PM EST Tuesday, 03/13.
+1
comments and notes
-
(subjective recommendations, not binding)
typo in DISCLAIMER.tx
Added a note on tracking down the Software Grant for woden.
-- dims
On 3/13/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This month's ASF Board reports should be written up on the wiki at
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/March2007
River and Woden are not nearly detailed enough. We need
> This month's ASF Board reports should be written up on the wiki at
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/March2007
River and Woden are not nearly detailed enough. We need status, issues
required for graduation, etc. Not just the project description. The other
reports can be viewed for examples.
We discussed similar issue on out Tuscany dev list, see this thread:
http://www.mail-archive.com/tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org/msg12758.html
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
On 3/13/07, Martin Sebor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm wondering if anyone else has noticed the proble
Bozhong Lin wrote:
> we would like to cut 2.0 release sooner without fully passing
> JAX-WS TCK, and plan to push JAX-WS TCK test into 2.1 release
> plan. Of course, in CXF 2.0 release note, we will explicitly
> mention that Apache CXF does NOT claim any JAX-WS compliant
> yet, like what we did wi
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
> Do we have anything written down about what happens/should happen to
> incoming codebases/projects AFTER a podling graduates? Example, what
> happens if a few people want to keep the old/original project alive?
<> I suppose that would result in a fork. Is this particular
I'm wondering if anyone else has noticed the problem noted in
INFRA-1185 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-1185),
namely that not all posts appear in our browsable archives.
Also, do people use the Apache mbox browser or do they prefer
some other interface? If the latter, which one? I'
Folks,
Do we have anything written down about what happens/should happen to
incoming codebases/projects AFTER a podling graduates? Example, what
happens if a few people want to keep the old/original project alive?
Guess, what's the point in starting an incubation process here if they
never planne
+1 from me.
-- dims
On 3/9/07, Rick McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The Yoko community voted on and has approved a proposal to release Yoko
Milestone 2. Pursuant to the Releases section of the Incubation
Policy we would now like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC
to publish the m
IANAL, but I have some experience with TCKs.
You should be fine with releasing CXF as long as you don't claim
compliance with a JSR whose TCK you don't pass. You would want to
carefully review the documentation to make the non-compliance clear
wherever the relevant JSRs are mentioned.
So
Bo,
I believe this should be ok from a legal standpoint.
thanks,
dims
On 3/13/07, Bozhong Lin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Apache CXF team is planning for its 2.0 final release. In benefit of CXF
users, we would like to cut 2.0 release sooner without fully passing
JAX-WS TCK, and plan to pu
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Overall the release looks good to me. I verified the *.asc signatures
and looked more closely at uimaj-2.1.0-incubating-src.tar.gz .
I noticed just one thing that struck me as
Hi,
Apache CXF team is planning for its 2.0 final release. In benefit of CXF
users, we would like to cut 2.0 release sooner without fully passing
JAX-WS TCK, and plan to push JAX-WS TCK test into 2.1 release plan. Of
course, in CXF 2.0 release note, we will explicitly mention that Apache
CXF
22 matches
Mail list logo
