On 4/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
SNIP ...
ASF members -do- have additional insights from private forums, and the
ability to oversee most of the private forums at the ASF. This means
they can (and do) go back to the archives to look back at how a specific
issue (people
On Apr 10, 2007, at 10:58 PM, Brian McCallister wrote:
If someone can step up to help OpenJPA I will trade off :-)
I haven't been a fantastic mentor for OpenJPA, anyway :-(
(Not trying to ditch OpenJPA, just trying to open up options :-)
-Brian
If someone can step up to help OpenJPA I will trade off :-)
I haven't been a fantastic mentor for OpenJPA, anyway :-(
-Brian
On Apr 10, 2007, at 7:46 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
I am informed that QPid has two Mentors. Would someone please
volunteer to
act as a third? QPid is an technology
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
>
> Personally, I think the project is suffering from a chicken-egg problem.
> Without releases no users, without users no developers, without developers no
> releases.
> Somehow it also feels to me that either dotNet has no credibility at ASF, or
> that ASF has no credibi
And I'm told that CXF would like another mentor or two.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wednesday 11 April 2007 10:54, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> Personally, I think the project is suffering from a chicken-egg problem.
> Without releases no users, without users no developers, without developers
> no releases.
I also think that the advice recently given to FtpServer project (also a
s
On Wednesday 11 April 2007 08:41, George Aroush wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Please jump in and vote on this release. It has been well
> over 4 weeks since my original submission. What will it take
> to get this vote moving? Is there anything more that I need to do?!
Personally, I think the project i
I am informed that QPid has two Mentors. Would someone please volunteer to
act as a third? QPid is an technology in the MQ/JMS messaging problem
domain, seeking to provide a vendor neutral protocol for interoperable
messaging.
--- Noel
-
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Someone is nominated the iPMC as an active, involved contributor.
No one needs to be on the Incubator PMC because they are an active contributor.
They should be on the Incubator PMC because they care about Incubation, and
Mentoring one or more projects.
> Bottom
Cliff Schmidt wrote:
> 1. Only IPMC members (e.g. mentors) should send root requests for new
>podling committers.
> 2. A podling committer vote requires three IPMC +1s to be approved
> (ideally the mentors, assuming the project still has three mentors).
> This [is] not how I read what we ha
Hi folks,
Please jump in and vote on this release. It has been well
over 4 weeks since my original submission. What will it take
to get this vote moving? Is there anything more that I need to do?!
Thanks!
-- George Aroush
> -Original Message-
> From: George Aroush [mailto:[EMAIL
On 4/10/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
looks good (niclas has already discussed Wicket vs Apache Wicket)
Ok, thanks for the feedback. In a couple of days I'll be able to cut a
new release (we're renaming everything to org.apache.wicket currently,
and that is of course not
On 4/10/07, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/8/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MANIFESTs are a little controversial (there are multiple specs which
> are open to interpretation). i'm of the maximal school of thought:
> putting everything in which people thin
On 4/6/07, Martin Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ok, I think that has cleared things up a bit for me I'll send out
these requests that I've been sitting on for a few weeks now as we
need to get the accounts set up for our new committers.
Just as it appeared this subject was cleared up, Noel
On 3/15/07, Marnie McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All,
This vote closed on Tuesday night and the result is as follows:
Votes Cast:
9+
0-
Thus, Rupert Smith should now be created as a committer on the Qpid project.
Although this vote closed several weeks ago, I'm adding my +1 as the
me
On 3/15/07, Marnie McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All,
This vote closed on Tuesday night and the result is as follows:
Votes Cast:
6+
0-
Thus, Kevin Smith should now be created as a committer on the Qpid project.
Although this vote closed several weeks ago, I'm adding my +1 as the
men
On 3/15/07, Marnie McCormack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
All,
This vote closed on Tuesday night and the result is as follows:
Votes Cast:
9+
0-
Thus, Tomas Restrepo should now be created as a committer on the Qpid
project.
Although this vote closed several weeks ago, I'm adding my +1 as one
Ted Husted wrote:
> On 4/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> But there is nothing stopping individuals from becoming a contributor.
>> I guess my point is that mentorship isn't a privilege, and shouldn't be
>> viewed as a feather in one's cap. We need active mentors, not th
Craig L Russell wrote:
> I'm confused. The Process Description [1] seems to be clear:
>
> The Mentor is automatically made a member of the Incubator PMC, and
> reports to both the PMC and the Sponsor about your overall health and
> suitability for eventual inclusion within the Apache Community (or
I'm confused. The Process Description [1] seems to be clear:
The Mentor is automatically made a member of the Incubator PMC, and
reports to both the PMC and the Sponsor about your overall health and
suitability for eventual inclusion within the Apache Community (or
recommendation to termina
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Ted Husted wrote:
> > In most cases, the underlying issue would be timing. We accept
> > podlings and mentors year round. ASF Members we accept only
> > once or twice a year.
> I'd agree with you if I perceived Mentorship as a privilege.
That seems irrelevant to Ted
Ted Husted wrote:
> As I understand it, once the proposal is accepted, the Mentors listed
> on the proposal become IPMC members. Once the proposal is accepted,
> and the group becomes a podling, then, yes, all Mentors and IPMC
> Members.
The Mentors being listed is interesting, but we had better
On 4/10/07, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 17:50, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> Specification-Title: Wicket
> Implementation-Title: Wicket
Not sure if it matters much, but your will be known as Apache Wicket to
safe-guard against trademark protection and similar i
On Tuesday 10 April 2007 17:50, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> Specification-Title: Wicket
> Implementation-Title: Wicket
Not sure if it matters much, but your will be known as Apache Wicket to
safe-guard against trademark protection and similar issues.
Cheers
Niclas
On 4/9/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'd agree with you if I perceived Mentorship as a privilege. I don't,
I view it entirely as a responsibility to convey "What is Apache" to
an aspiring podling. I don't disagree that any of our iPMC members
(members of any PMC at the fou
On 4/8/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
MANIFESTs are a little controversial (there are multiple specs which
are open to interpretation). i'm of the maximal school of thought:
putting everything in which people think are required stops sniping.
I have updated our build, and
26 matches
Mail list logo
