hi Greg,
Maybe it would be a good idea to forward this or somethign similar to the
committers list. I'd say there is a number of a committers who are not
aware of these legal issues.
Whaddayareckon?
Conor
> If you don't have a binding vote, then you are not responsible. The people
> *with* th
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:12 pm, Sam Ruby wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > When will you guys ever get a clue?
>
> I must say that this entire thread made my day. It is *nice* to see
> this group of people collaborating.
>
We just need to get the infrastructure guys on board.
Conor
--
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003 08:14 am, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> Ben,
>
> You're being obstructionist. Lets not make this into a big political
> thing.
Andy, as usual, you're making mountains out of molehills. There IS broad
agreement - let's just go forward with this.
Conor
-
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 12:24 pm, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> but then
> came one of those mysterious silences.
>
> In any case. I do not regard this as fault of the incubator.
>
Andy,
Please don't miss the point. The point is not whether these are suitable
projects for Jakarta. That itself is an int
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 11:33 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The Incubator project needs to take a proactive role in ensuring that new
> projects are brought to Apache the right way, not just be an extra helper.
> This means documentation, processes to be followed etc.
>
I have to agree. AFAICT, acc
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 10:17 am, Howard M. Lewis Ship wrote:
> All audit issues have been taken care of, per the schedule I posted on the
> Audit.
>
> The GPL module and all code that imports it no longer exists (we could
> remove the ,v file from the repository I suppose).
> The LPGL modules used in
On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 04:04 pm, Jeff Turner wrote:
> Feh.
>
> Incubation was a dumb idea from the start. It is busy failing in
> practice.
>
> PMCs should manage the acceptance of new subprojects, not some
> disinterested Incubator PMC.
>
> IMHO, scrap this failed experiment and let Tapestry migrate
Sam Ruby wrote:
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Isn't that a no no?
The board is discussing this.
What scares the crap out of me is the weasel words. "intent to offer
royalty free...".
As a rule, lawyers are very careful in what they say and do not say. I
can only presume that the word "intent"
Sander Striker wrote:
Hold on there. I was pointing out that our current infrastructural
related things that committers should be aware of are currently
documented at http://www.apache.org/dev/. I wanted to keep stuff
about cvs together with the other stuff about cvs. If our Incubator
site is
Hi all,
It seems that I too was under the impression that the incubator project
would be providing the documentation on the "Apache Way". AIUI, Incubator
would not only serve to help new projects develop the Apache way of doing
things, it would serve as the definitive reference for all other pr
10 matches
Mail list logo
