when I followed this thread in gmail.
Martijn
On 10/6/06, Mark Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In which case I apologies if I got the context wrong. Let's please
just collectively shake hands (hard to do via email I know) and agree
to buy each other some drinks if we ever catch
In which case I apologies if I got the context wrong. Let's please
just collectively shake hands (hard to do via email I know) and agree
to buy each other some drinks if we ever catch up face-to-face.
All the best,
Mark.
On 6 Oct 2006, at 22:29, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN P
On 6 Oct 2006, at 21:34, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark Little wrote:
1) ASF is a meritocracy.
And people learn by questioning, not by being passive observers!
Actually, I think that's patently false. You never learned
anything f
On 6 Oct 2006, at 21:08, Henri Yandell wrote:
Replying from the peanut gallery because the friction is getting
too high.
On 10/6/06, Mark Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6 Oct 2006, at 18:10, Leo Simons wrote:
>
> Erm.
>
> 1) ASF is a meritocracy.
And people le
On 6 Oct 2006, at 18:10, Leo Simons wrote:
On Oct 5, 2006, at 4:19 PM, Mark Little wrote:
On 5 Oct 2006, at 14:54, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
Mark Little wrote:
On 4 Oct 2006, at 23:20, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
You will, of course, infer and interpret events as you choose.
It&#
On 5 Oct 2006, at 14:54, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark Little wrote:
On 4 Oct 2006, at 23:20, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
You will, of course, infer and interpret events as you choose.
It's pretty obvious to me, a complete outsider,
On 4 Oct 2006, at 23:20, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark Little wrote:
Is random denial of initial commiters typical?
Not at all, in fact I'm confident that's never ever happened. The
assertion that this decision is "rand
+1
On 2 Oct 2006, at 22:02, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Oct 2, 2006, at 5:28 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
-1. Of the people participating in a new project, the Mentors
are the
least capable of selecting a PPMC.
I don't think that's true. At least not in the case of CXF.
You mean it isn't alwa
It is useful information and thanks for it. I was simply trying to
point out that there are other ways of managing an open source
project and probably no one right way of doing things.
Mark.
On 2 Oct 2006, at 18:44, Garrett Rooney wrote:
On 10/2/06, Mark Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
t. It only took 2 months for us to figure that one out.
Mark.
On 2 Oct 2006, at 18:20, Jim Jagielski wrote:
On Oct 2, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Mark Little wrote:
That kind of depends what you're used to now doesn't it? In some
circles really getting involved actively can best be done
Like I said before: "Without wanting to open up flames about what
constitutes a true "open" source project." Your statements are
subjective.
Mark.
On 2 Oct 2006, at 17:57, Garrett Rooney wrote:
On 10/2/06, Mark Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That kind of d
send CLAs, get
committer access, then get involved. However, I feel like we've
covered this before ;-)
Mark.
On 2 Oct 2006, at 17:41, Garrett Rooney wrote:
On 10/2/06, Mark Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Without wanting to open up flames about what constitutes a true
On 2 Oct 2006, at 16:31, Daniel Kulp wrote:
On Monday October 02 2006 10:54 am, Newcomer, Eric wrote:
How could they contribute when they were not given access?
The same way any non-commiter contributor contributes to a project:
1) JIRA - creating JIRA items, submitting patches, etc... I ad
Without wanting to open up flames about what constitutes a true
"open" source project: if you're trying to build up a community then
not erecting artificial barriers to entry is a good start. I've used
the Redhat/JBoss example already, but there are others where the
communities thrive and g
On 2 Oct 2006, at 08:17, Leo Simons wrote:
At the formation of the project all members of the group were
asked to submit signed ICLAs, which we did via fax and snail-mail.
However, due to a problem with the fax, after 4 weeks they hadn't
turned up and we re-submitted. This time, at the s
On 1 Oct 2006, at 21:16, Daniel Kulp wrote:
Justin,
On Sunday October 01 2006 3:22 pm, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
We've seen an example of this with Celtixfire. So far, we're
waiting for
an explanation (as those discussions did not occur in a place
where the
Incubator PMC could provide an
lk privately within themselves,
and any leaking of that information is considered
a VERY bad thing to do.
On Sep 29, 2006, at 5:06 AM, Mark Little wrote:
Redhat were one of the supporters of the Celtixfire incubator
project and discussed with the proposers to add Kevin Conner and
myself to the
Redhat were one of the supporters of the Celtixfire incubator project
and discussed with the proposers to add Kevin Conner and myself to
the list of initial commiters. As part of this, our names were
included in the proposal. Both Kevin and I are working on Redhat
related projects and see a
18 matches
Mail list logo
