Thanks for noticing. Fixed now.
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:40 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Hiram,
>
> The link to the vote thread is broken. Can you double check it?
>
> John
>
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 1:37 PM Hiram Chirino
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>
Hi Guys,
I finished filling out the following ip clearance form on behalf of
the ActiveMQ PMC.
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/ip-clearance/hornetq.xml
Is there anything else thats required to consider the code grant complete?
Thanks!
--
Hiram Chirino
Engineering
I think the Geronimo folks are still actively using the OW2 Howl
project so if you bring in another apache project called the same
think I think it's going to cause confusion for their users.
Regards,
Hiram
FuseSource
Web: http://fusesource.com/
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Shane Curcuru
that putting it in the pom might not be a good idea, is
that we also include all the checksums for transitive dependencies
that are not explicitly listed in the pom.
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Niklas Gustavsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Hiram C
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 11:39 PM, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 10:08 PM, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> There are maven plugins that can validate the checksums of 3rd party
>> dependencies.
>
> Uhhh... Call m
Note that problem A and B both occur at manual steps in the
build/development process.
Just wanted to point that out to folks who complain that maven is
insecure because it downloads stuff automatically.
With checksums, as long as the manual steps are secure, automated bits
should be secure too.
On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 11:20 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
>>
>> > There is a pretty nice proposal on
>> > http://people.apache.org/~henkp/trust/, however this will again take a
>> >
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:27 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 13:42 -0400, Hiram Chirino wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 10:12 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On 22/09/2008, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:20 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 09:34 -0400, Hiram Chirino wrote:
>> The only reason I suggested including the sigs in the source distro is
>> because a source build like Apache ServiceMix depends on
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 10:12 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 22/09/2008, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The only reason I suggested including the sigs in the source distro is
>> because a source build like Apache ServiceMix depends on
TED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-09-20 at 10:08 +0100, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> How
How about we include the signatures in the source distros? That way
if you trust your source, then you can trust the dependencies it
downloads.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sep 17, 2008, at 5:32 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
>
>> The only
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 4:57 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 18/09/2008, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 2:26 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
>>
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hiram Chirino wrote:
&
Trust me I'm not trying to be difficult..
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 4:53 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hiram, I wish you would desist already from debating positions that you
> can't defend...
>
> Hiram Chirino wrote:
>>
>> On Th
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:07 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 18/09/2008, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:59 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On 18/09/2008, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
Right.. It's part of the source distro or SVN.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:08 PM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> The checksums are _not_ downloaded from the Maven repository.
>>
>> So where are they stored?
>
>
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 2:26 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hiram Chirino wrote:
>>
>> So the responsibility is still on us, the upstream distributor, to
>> verify the the checksums we list in our source distro are correct.
>> But at least by
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:59 AM, sebb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 18/09/2008, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:42 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
>>
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Similarly, the iss
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:42 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Similarly, the issue of signature validation is a significant flaw which
> I also hope maven addresses even more promptly, and which they are aware
> of. The alternatives are to take down maven until it is secure, o
Something else that needs to be considered is what happens if
someone's private key in the web of trust gets compromised?
Once compromised. malicious releases could get re-rolled, and deployed.
I think GPG would be good to validate an initial dependency/checksum
for an artifact, but after that fut
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 1:19 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maven is *too* transparent in what it does: it hides the disclaimer,
> preventing the POLICY of ensuring that users are explicitly aware of and
> agree to use of Incubator artifacts.
>
We I think this could easily be fi
Hi Noel,
If the problem your trying to solve with artifact signing is detect
and reject malicious artifacts that have been deployed to hacked
repository, then there is a simpler fix that is available today. Just
use the checksum plugin that I described here:
http://hiramchirino.com/blog/2008/08/
I like plain rat, and since rat is common word I doubt we have to
worry about trademark violations. I also don't confuse it with any
other projects in the java space.. so I think it's ok.
On 10/23/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/RatProposal
Hey Robert..
You have something that checks a directory tree full of binary .jar
files for the embedded LICENSE files?? If you do, could you post it..
It would make my life easier.
On 9/24/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/22/07, Daniel Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
client.
Regards,
Hiram
Paul
On 6/7/07, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I ceased use of and destroyed my copy of the Specification years ago =)
>
> But seriously, what kind of IP is it that is being violated?
> copyright? patent? or some other kind that I'm no
I ceased use of and destroyed my copy of the Specification years ago =)
But seriously, what kind of IP is it that is being violated?
copyright? patent? or some other kind that I'm not aware of?
Regards,
Hiram
On 6/1/07, Arnaud Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
We have been thinking abou
I just added the ActiveMQ one. Apologies for the delay.
On 12/18/06, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Projects in the Incubator have been very busy. Tuscany, Qpid, Felix, CXF,
Synapse, Yoko, OpenJPA and Abdera have all been going through Incubator
releases in the past month.
Cayenne
---Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
> Of Hiram Chirino
> Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2006 2:52 PM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE WITHDRAWN] publish openjpa 0.9.6-incubating release
>
> To avoid those issue
new directory.
On 11/21/06, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Sorry, I just don't like that changes to the bits based on an
internal review should change the name of the release.
Craig
On Nov 21, 2006, at 2:51 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
> To avoid those issue ActiveMQ
Howdy ActiveMQ Mentors...
This is just a gentle reminder that this vote is still open and
looking for at least 1 more incubator PMC binding vote to make it
official. Please take a moment and review the release.
Thanks!
On 11/14/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey folks,
To avoid those issue ActiveMQ tends to do a build of say ActiveMQ
4.1.0 and we drop it in
a directory called ActiveMQ-4.1.0-RC1 and then if during the vote
something happens, we rebuild and 4.1.0 again and put it in directory
called RC2 etc.
So I would guess you guys just need to put out at 0.9.
On 11/16/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/16/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/15/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/14/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
On 11/15/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/14/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> I was able to finally get around to doing a binary release candidate
> from the 4.1 branch.
>
> it's available here:
>
On 11/15/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/14/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> I was able to finally get around to doing a binary release candidate
> from the 4.1 branch.
>
> it's available here:
>
Hey folks,
I was able to finally get around to doing a binary release candidate
from the 4.1 branch.
it's available here:
http://people.apache.org/~chirino/incubator-activemq-4.1.0-RC2/m2-incubating-repository/org/apache/activemq/apache-activemq/4.1.0-incubator/
Maven 1 and Maven 2 repos for t
Unless I'm lossing email... I think we still need a few more votes
from incubator pmc members to make this release official. Anybody
around that can help check this release??
On 10/29/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Some last minute NOTICE issues were still present
Some last minute NOTICE issues were still present in the 5th release
candidate of the
4.0.2 build. We have also received confirmation from Apache legal
discuss that it's ok to include work covered by the "Creative Commons
Attribution" license. I have cut and RC 6 of the 4.0.2 build with the
fixe
On 10/19/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/19/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some copyright header/licence/notice issues were found in the 4th
release
> candidate of the
> 4.0.2 build. I have cut and RC 5 of the 4.0.2 build wi
Some copyright header/licence/notice issues were found in the 4th release
candidate of the
4.0.2 build. I have cut and RC 5 of the 4.0.2 build with the fixes and it's
available here:
http://people.apache.org/~chirino/incubator-activemq-4.0.2-RC5/maven1/incubator-activemq/distributions/
Maven 1
nice thanks!
On 10/18/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hiram Chirino wrote:
> Plus there are some that I'm not sure if there is a syntax for comments.
> Anybody know if you can add comments to a JAAS config file?
>
>
>
See
http://svn.apache.org/v
6 22:59:31 +0100
Subject: Re: [VOTE] approve the 4.0.2 (RC4) release of ActiveMQ
On 10/2/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
> Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.0.2 release
> binary. The l
Hi ActiveMQ Project Mentors...
If you get a chance, could you please checkout the release and cast a
vote. Thanks!
On 10/2/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approv
ppmc +1's and no -1s.
+1 Hiram Chirino
+1 James Strachan
+1 Rob Davies
+1 Guillaume Nodet
+1 Brian McCallister
+1 Alan D. Cabrera
+1 Aaron Mulder
Release tarball:
http://people.apache.org/~chirino/incubator-activemq-4.0.2-RC4/maven1/incubator-activemq/distributions/
Releases section o
yay.. congrats!
On 9/27/06, Guillaume Nodet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks to those who voted on this release.
The vote passes with 3 +1's :
+1 James Strachan
+1 Robert Burrell Donkin
+1 Davanum Srinivas
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
-
I want to thank all the folks that have taken the time to check the
release and cast their vote.
The vote passes with 4 binding +1's :
+1 Robert Burrell Donkin
+1 James Strachan
+1 Jason van Zyl
+1 Brian McCallister
and 2 non binding +1's
+1 Hiram Chirino
+1 J. Daniel Kulp
--
Rega
lease. Thanks!
On 9/14/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
Apache ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved the 4.1 release of
the ActiveMQ maven plugins. These plugins are required for the maven
build of the Activ
Hooray for
https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/tools/releases/gpg-sign-all
and rsync!
Everything under
http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-incubating-repository/org/apache/activemq/
is not signed! It was not that hard!
On 9/15/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
O
On 9/14/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/14/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/14/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 9/14/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > remember that
On 9/14/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/14/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You can checkout the binary build here:
> http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-incubating-repository/org/apache/activemq/
+1
Thanks!
a few notes:
t
consume.
We would now like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC to
perform the release.
Vote thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-activemq-dev/200609.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Vote result:
The VOTE has passed with 5 ppmc +1's and no -1s.
+1 Hiram Chirino
+1 Guil
Doh. thanks for checking.. I've opened a JIRA up for those issues:
http://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-888
I'm going to use the perl scripts to find the files that are missing
the headers.
On 8/18/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/17/06, Hiram
-402-release.html
Vote thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-activemq-dev/200608.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]
Vote result:
The VOTE has passed with 7 ppmc +1's and no -1s.
+1 Hiram Chirino
+1 James Strachan
+1 Rob Davies
+1 Guillaume Nodet
+1 Alan D. Cabrera
+1 Aaron Mulder
+1
On 6/21/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
CXFilre sounds good to me ;-)
Doh... replace with: CXFire
On 6/21/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/21/06, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Currently the plan is to leave both t
CXFilre sounds good to me ;-)
On 6/21/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/21/06, Dan Diephouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Currently the plan is to leave both the old websites & docs will at the
> old locations. And XFire will be making release until Celtixfire
> releases a .0
So as I see it, it comes down to a choice of having the user configure
his pom with either
1) an artifact id or group id or version id that includes "incubator" in it.
or
2) a repository id that include "incubator" in it.
#1 is what most projects do today. It would be nice if they were more
cons
Hi Robert,
The incubator-activemq-4.0.jar is an uber jar that is built by
aggregating the activemq broker, client and a few dependency jars like
derby. I think derby is where IBM reference comes from and also
explains the multiple copies of the same file thing (different jars
were using differen
On 5/30/06, Martin Sebor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 5/27/06, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 5/27/06, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Is STATUS appropriate to be bundled in the release?
>> >
>>
>> I had the same question relating
Cliff has been doing so. Frankly, I suspect that many ASF projects need to
clean up their releases to conform with the currently solidifying ASF-wide
guidelines, but the Incubator PMC is more aware of them, and more diligent
in applying them.
From the perspective of being involved in one of
Agreed. Any tools that help incubating projects get off to the right
start we be a good start. Even if it's just a check list that has all
the things that have been found to be missing before in previous
attempted releases would be a great idea.
On 6/2/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wro
Shouldn't the release be pgp signed?
On 5/30/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
The Synapse community has voted
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/ws-synapse-dev/200605.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED])
to release a Synapse Milestone (M2) release.
This release implements the update
The binary has now been rebuilt to address those issues. I'm guessing
we need to restart a vote on activemq dev list just to be formal, but
I'm sure it will pass just like the previous vote did.
On 5/27/06, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
README.txt and userGuide.html (at least) should
like to request the permission of the Incubator PMC to
> > perform the release.
> >
> > Proposal:
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-activemq-dev/200603.mbox/[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]
> >
> > Vote threads:
> > http://mail-archives.a
+1
/Hiram
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leo,
Many of the folks in the ActiveMQ project already have been through
the incubation process once before when we put Geronimo though. It's
not like this is our first rodeo. So in our eyes we really do think
we are very close to having satisfied the incubation requirements. I
think Alan was o
projects trusted those individuals enough in the past to give them
commit privileges, perhaps the TLP PMC may want to see more recent
activity to evaluate if they truly 'get' the Apache way.
Regards,
Hiram
On 3/15/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/15/06, Hiram Chirin
Hi Noel,
If the ActiveMQ / ServiceMix community do decide to go under some
other TLP, I'm sure it would not take long for the active
participants of the community to asked to Join the TLP's PMC. It
would behoove that PMC to include such active community participants
in the decision making procce
Great! I've pushed out the binaries out to the maven repo.
http://cvs.apache.org/repository/incubator-activemq
Regards,
Hiram
On 3/8/06, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Huge thanks Ken! That makes it 3 +1s from Incubator PMC members and no -1s
> after nearly 3 weeks of voting so I
On Feb 18, 2006, at 2:23 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Why are you being so negative? Let's try to make it work. If it does
not then we decide what do next as a PPMC.
I did not know that technical decisions were the responsibilities of
the PMC/PPMC. Could you explain further?
Being negat
+1! (non binding)
Regards,
Hiram
On Feb 17, 2006, at 1:09 PM, James Strachan wrote:
In accordance with the incubator release procedure (see below) the
ActiveMQ community has voted on and approved a proposal to release
the 2nd candidate of the 4.0-M4 release.
We would now like to request the
Hi Matthieu,
I don't think Aaron would disagree with you. Going back to his
transaction manager analogy, a transaction manager is much more
complicated than geronimo the container. Just like a BPLE engine is
much more complicated than a JBI container. The beautiful thing
geronimo and s
I don't see any further issues with the ActiveMQ M4 release. I think
we should we restart the release vote.
Regards,
Hiram
On Feb 8, 2006, at 2:56 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Noel,
I think that these issues have now been addressed. I have gathered
up the information from subsequent repli
On Feb 1, 2006, at 5:42 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
How should the disclaimer be associated?
Well, this is a bit of an issue. Why are the plain jars
available? To
allow automated downloads by Maven? I have an issue with that,
since it
could allow people to use the code without knowin
[X] +1 Release the binary as 4.0-M4
Regards,
Hiram
On Jan 30, 2006, at 12:06 AM, James Strachan wrote:
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
Hi,
I think this would be great! I know it's silly, but I get annoyed at
the fact that many of the J2EE spec jars that I use from apache have
"geronimo-" in the jar name but It's just the ASL 2.0 spec jars that
I'm using and not really a geronimo implementation. In general, I
think that
74 matches
Mail list logo
