On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Marvin Humphrey
wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Luke Han wrote:
> > There's one discussion in Kylin community about to add binary
> > package in release, people are really would like to have one:
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-
Was the potential trademark conflict discussed somewhere? See
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201212.mbox/%3c50ca29ad.6000...@apache.org%3E-
if so, just linking to the discussion is fine.
Kalle
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Joachim Dreimann wrote:
> +1 (non-binding
Also - there's a fairly new startup in San Francisco area going by the same
name Bloodhound (see http://bloodhound.com/). I'm not associated with them,
just happened to hear about them. It's obviously not in the same business
but given how Apache projects have traditionally been rather cautious wit
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 12:02 PM, seba.wag...@gmail.com
wrote:
> is this the only concern or are there any other objections that will only
> be checked in the next round?
A vote is a vote. You can express general concerns but if nobody's
voting against, take the comments and fix them in the next v
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 11:06 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> I fear we are miscommunicating again.
> Only the copyright owner is allowed to (re)move copyright notices
> or permit others to (re)move them on the owner's behalf.
Interesting, why is that? Is it so by the law?
Kalle
---
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Hyrum K Wright
wrote:
> I think the Trac community sees this as a zero-sum game: if people are
> contributing to Bloodhound, they *aren't* contributing to Trac.
> "Instead, we should try to convince the Bloodhound people that our
> philosophy is best, and they shoul
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> This has been the subject of prior conversations, but I'm opening a
> thread in some hope of reaching a definitive resolution.
> Some of our non-graduating podlings have a common problem. They look
> good in all ways except growth. This in
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Jan 3, 2012 1:28 PM, "Kalle Korhonen" wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
>> > So the generic policy is there is no generic policy, and instead there
>> > is appropriate appli
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Leo Simons wrote:
> So the generic policy is there is no generic policy, and instead there
> is appropriate application of judgement to specific cases.
Generic policy doesn't mean you couldn't use judgement or make
exceptions. In principle, if the ASF's mission is
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Agreed. That is/was my read, too.
Even still, companies don't participate in ASF projects, individuals
do. To me, the proposal implies Adobe is a participating entity. The
sentence in question would read better as "To that end, employees of
Ado
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:39 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 16 November 2011 14:32, Thilo Goetz wrote:
>> On 15/11/11 03:22, Benson Margulies wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 9:20 PM, sebb wrote:
On 15 November 2011 02:12, Benson Margulies wrote:
> That page is very misleading, and there was a
+1 (non-binding)
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
> Opemeetings proposal has been discussed a few times here before. The group of
> developers behind it worked hard (and succeeded) to address all potential
> obstacles to the Incubator acceptance and to the following incub
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
wrote:
> wrote:
>> But yes, I agree that using "kill search" is probably a bad idea.
>> What podlings needs to do is essentially "fact finding" (not
>> interpretation). Perhaps someone could come up with something along
>> this line of thinki
2011/8/11 seba.wag...@gmail.com :
> I have updated the Proposal to be more clear on the external dependencies
> and possibilities to move away from them:
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenmeetingsProposal#External_Dependencies
>From the sidelines, WebSockets would seem like a strong contender
Agree that the scope of Rat alone is limited. You mean if Rat proposed
to graduate as Apache Tools (or even Apache Infrastructure Tools)? Rat
could start as the TLP and later become a sub project once other tools
graduate and join Apache Tools as sub projects. Makes sense to me as
there are a lot o
+1 (non-binding) for the retirement proposal.
Chen, the vote has nothing to do with whether you manage to release
the 4th version or not, and the failure to see that and the failure to
understand what Apache and the incubator is about is a testament to
why the project should be retired, in my mind
Having gone through project renames from Jsecurity to Ki to Shiro, I
can attest that it's much less painful to change the name sooner
rather than later. If there's even an indication that a
naming/trademark conflict may occur, it almost certainly will at some
point. I realize this is not a naming s
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 08:47, James Carman wrote:
> I haven't followed this particular issue because it seems like a
> slamdunk easy thing. If the podling wants to change their name, then
> fine. Sounds easy enough. I would see no reason for an
-0.5 (non-binding), I find the proposed name rather confusing
Kalle
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After much debate both here and on the connectors mailing list, the LCF
> community has voted (see
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-connecto
Bergman
Non-binding vote:
David Jencks
Thank you all, we'll take the result to the Board!
Kalle
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Kalle Korhonen
wrote:
> The Apache Shiro community and the mentors of the project think the
> project is ready to graduate and is asking for IPMC's rec
4:03 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>
> On Aug 17, 2010, at 3:24 PM, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 2:09 PM, David Jencks wrote:
>>> Dunno if it's exactly documentation but see this from Roy Fielding
>>> https://
ense files scattered around our source
tree. I'm with Stefano there: I do contest the view that svn is the
release, but let's leave that for another thread. I'm watching the
issue and perhaps I'll restore the LICENSE file on top of the tree.
Kalle
> On Aug 16, 2010, a
sebb wrote:
>
>> On 16 August 2010 19:18, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
>>> The Apache Shiro community and the mentors of the project think the
>>> project is ready to graduate and is asking for IPMC's recommendation
>>> to present the project resolution to the b
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Your head is in the sand. The Incubator is a broken process. Everybody
> hates it. Everybody wants to get out of it. Subversion was fortunate
> in that we had enough support to bully our way through, to route
> around damage, and to check everyt
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:43 AM, sebb wrote:
> Also, just noticed that the SVN tree does not appear to have a copy of
> the LICENSE file.
> Normally this is stored alongside the NOTICE file at the top-level, i.e. in
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/trunk/
> Looks like the file wa
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 11:33 AM, sebb wrote:
> On 16 August 2010 19:18, Kalle Korhonen wrote:
> Some of the incubation stages don't seem to have been completed, at
> least according to the page:
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/shiro.html
> Perhaps these items hav
e projects within the scope of responsibility of
The Apache Shiro Project; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and
hereby are appointed to serve as the initial members of The
Apache Shiro Project:
* Les Hazlewood (lhazlew...@apache.org)
* Kalle Korho
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 4:42 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 01/06/2010, Les Hazlewood wrote:
>> Otherwise we assume the release would have been voted against.
> The lack of a DISCLAIMER was reported as part of the vote.
> I don't know why it was not considered blocking.
Either you vote or you don't, ever
Vote closed and passed, lazy consensus.
Binding votes:
+1 Ant Elder
Non-binding votes:
+1 Gerolf Seitz
Thank you all. Release promoted, announcements to follow.
Kalle
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Kalle Korhonen
wrote:
> This is the first incubator release for Apache Shiro, vers
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:14 AM, sebb wrote:
> It's a bit confusing to have two copies of the N&L files in the root
> of the archive:
> LICENSE and LICENSE.txt have the same content.
> NOTICE and NOTICE.txt have significantly different content.
> LICENSE and NOTICE are not in SVN as far as I can
This is the first incubator release for Apache Shiro, version
1.0.0-incubating. The release is made following the standard
Apache/Maven release process as documented at
http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. This
is a lazy consensus vote as we already received 3 binding IPM
Noel J. Bergman kindly added me back to the group (thanks!), all good now.
Kalle
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Kalle Korhonen
wrote:
> Hello, my username "kaosko" has been removed from "incubator" group
> for some reason. I'm a committer in Shiro project,
ore.
Les Hazlewood (lhazlewood, also a committer in the same project) is
part of the incubator group. Can somebody add me back in?
Thanks,
Kalle Korhonen (kaosko)
-- Forwarded message --
From: Kalle Korhonen
Date: Wed, May 12, 2010 at 11:30 PM
Subject: Permission issue writing to /
+1 Apache Shiro
Kalle
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:45 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This is the final vote for the Apache JSecurity/Ki project's new name
> between the two proposed finalists. Please vote for only one of the
> following two (alphabetically-ordered) names:
>
> Apache Aseca
34 matches
Mail list logo
