Sounds good to me.
If there’s agreement on this, I’d suggest someone come up with some CSS which
can be popped into project sites similar to what GitHub offers for their
banners. (I’m not very good at CSS myself…) ;-)
Harbs
> On Mar 31, 2020, at 11:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>
,
Harbs
> On Mar 29, 2020, at 11:34 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I suggest you take this up with the board, as it is perhaps time to revisit
> it. The trademark email BTW was directly related to this graduation and the
> GitHub link, the project went further and remov
959@%3Cpress.apache.org%3E>
As far as I can tell, the action item on this stalled and the whole topic was
never completely resolved.
Thanks,
Harbs
> On Mar 29, 2020, at 10:16 AM, Harbs wrote:
>
> The discussion on trademarks is about general sponsor links. As far as I can
> te
couldn’t
find that. Do you have a link?
If an alternate ribbon was created, that should be recommended instead of
making a blanket statement that “Fork Me” is not allowed.
My $0.02,
Harbs
> On Mar 29, 2020, at 8:44 AM, Julian Hyde wrote:
>
> Ah, thanks Justin. Sorry I didn't no
list. It doesn’t seem like an infra question.
Maybe a branding discussion? Maybe comdev?
I figured incubator is as good a place as any, and the discussion was triggered
from here. Dunno.
If anyone has a strong preference to move it somewhere else, that’s fine with
me.
Thanks,
Harbs
> On
to be to
remove “GitHub” from the link.
I also wonder if opinions might have changed in the 5 years since that
discussion. In that time, GitHub has only become more ubiquitous and more
adopted by many Apache projects.
Thanks,
Harbs
> On Mar 27, 2020, at 12:03 PM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>
project
site because it can help build add contributions which builds the community.
Thoughts?
Harbs
> On Mar 27, 2020, at 12:31 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> I agree. `Fork me` is popular in the GitHub projects. :) I think could keep
>> it.
>
>
> You are
What about recommending that it be adopted by OpenOffice?
IIUC, ODF Toolkit predates OpenOffice becoming an Apache Project. It seems (to
an outsider like me) like the OpenOffice community would be a good home for a
related toolkit.
Harbs
On Mar 28, 2016, at 2:33 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On
attention must be paid to ensure that RTC does not
negatively effect the community.
Harbs
On Dec 2, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:53 AM, Jacques Nadeau wrote:
>> ...If the process is 3x+1 and more +1 than -1, this vote passes as Henry
on Google Code, so it
should be possible to go through that if it would help. (Of course a3commons
had close to 2000 commits so that’s going to be a lot of work…)
Harbs
[1]https://code.google.com/p/as3-commons/
[2]https://code.google.com/p/swizframework/
On Nov 28, 2015, at 7:57 PM, Ted Dunning
The code was originally on Google Code and has 26 people listed there.[1]
[1]https://code.google.com/p/as3-commons/people/list
On Nov 28, 2015, at 1:36 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>> 2) AS3Commons
>
> Which has two contributors and no closed pull requests. One of the
> contributors has already b
I think the chances of anyone making so much as a squeak in those projects is
close to zero.
Being that’s the case, my takeaway is that it’s ok to take them.
Harbs
On Nov 27, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>> On 11/26
officially accepted and will be checked out
from the (central approved) repo. It’s an interesting approach.
(I realize that some folks will still consider this “bad”, but I can see why it
might be attractive.)
Harbs
https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/intro-quick.html
sive bugs to be very high. It
seems like a certain amount of RTC can be a reasonable price to pay.
> Ralph
>
>> On Nov 25, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Harbs wrote:
>>
>> If a review is required for non-code changes to the main branch, then I
>> agree.
>>
>> I’
the reverted commit (at the
least) would have been caught.
I would actually welcome knowing someone looked over my code for a sanity check.
Harbs
On Nov 25, 2015, at 10:49 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> That is pretty normal operation in both styles of workflow. My concern is
> with trunk/master
;>
>>>> However, RTC seems to mean many things - from "push to JIRA for review
>>>> first, wait a bit, then commit to VCS" through "push to JIRA, and once
>>>> you have sufficient +1 votes, you can commit" to "push to JIRA for a
>&g
On Nov 25, 2015, at 10:37 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> AIUI, there’s two ways to go about RTC which is easier in Git:
>>
>
> That's not what Cos said. He said using Git does not lead to RTC.
>
> If RTC has been chosen, then you're right: Git makes it easier [than svn].
> But you've swapped cause/
the most vocal in his
opposition). What workflows do “CTR” proponents like to use?
Thanks,
Harbs
On Nov 25, 2015, at 6:47 PM, Upayavira wrote:
> Not replying to this mail specifically, but to the thread in general...
>
> People keep using the terms RTC and CTR as if we all mean the sam
comes to play… ;-)
Harbs
On Nov 25, 2015, at 4:08 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> I don't think Git is particularly empowering RTC - there's nothing in it that
> requires someone to look over one's shoulder.
This kind of underscores my observation that a large part of this debate is
driven by source control technologies.
RTC seems popular for projects using Git, while CTR seems popular in
communities using SVN.
RTC is a LOT easier using Git than SVN if the model is branching.
FWIW, I personally co
project…
If there is a disagreement, it seems to be part semantics, part version control
technologies (i.e. SVN optimized workflow vs Git optimized workflow) and part
an actual difference in how to handle certain situations. It seems to me that
the actual disagreement is pretty small. ;-)
Harbs
because you
don’t trust the person committing the code, but because you can’t rely on the
fact that everyone ELSE will look it over. That’s not “I don’t trust you” at
all.
My 2 cents,
Harbs
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr
. Since the
installer is not an “official Apache release”, it could be modified on Github
as much as we want with no voting required.
Harbs
On Oct 23, 2014, at 3:42 PM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> The easiest might be to host the Flex installer outside of Apache
>> F
Great!
I just created “flex-extras” and we’ll put in some appropriate text both on the
Github side and Apache Flex side. Hopefully this will prove to be a smooth
resolution.
Harbs
On Oct 23, 2014, at 1:22 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:44
a workable solution and side-step this whole issue. Would it
be okay to link to such a repository on the Flex download page with a
disclaimer that the installers are not blessed by Apache?
Harbs
On Oct 23, 2014, at 12:34 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014
. The script was failing because of a hiccup with getting JBurg
from Sourceforge. We wanted to resolve the issue by including the JBurg binary
directly.
That’s where all the confusion started… ;-)
Harbs
[1]http://jburg.sourceforge.net/
On Oct 23, 2014, at 11:46 AM, br...@apache.org wrote:
>
minimum disagreement.
Harbs
On Oct 23, 2014, at 10:11 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday, October 23, 2014, Roman Shaposhnik
> wrote:
>
>> ...I understand the need of projects like OO to provide binaries of some
> sort,
>> I just don'
correct me if I missed any points or misrepresented any of them.
Thanks,
Harbs
On Oct 21, 2014, at 9:35 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Harbs wrote:
>> The one thing I see missing from the proposed text is dependencies and
>> installers.
>>
The one thing I see missing from the proposed text is dependencies and
installers.
Particularly this section:
### Compiled packages ### {#compiled-packages}
The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All releases
are in the form of the source materials needed to make changes t
s is to increase the probability that the code will be maintained after
the donation. If the new committer does not follow through, there’s no harm
done.
I’m also not sure what history you mean. The only donation that I know of that
there was no follow through was the Swiz donation.
Harbs
30 matches
Mail list logo
