Re: [VOTE] Accept OpenOffice.org for incubation

-1 I do not think that accepting this podling is in the best interest of the ASF. Absent explicit criteria / principles governing what we accept into the Incubator, I have to apply informal judgment here and I am voting -1 for the following reasons: 0) I think the ASF has a responsibility to co

Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?

On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: >> >>> On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >>>> Wow. Did it occur to you that the orig

Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?

On 6/5/11 11:02 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/6/2011 12:47 AM, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >>> ASF members wish to devote considerable time and energy to this >>> project, so exactly who the hell are you to decide what th

Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?

On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/5/2011 11:43 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >> Agreed. I wish I had a clearer idea of what constitutes a good >> reason to reject an incubator proposal on principle, though - even >> just a good enough reason to reject this one.

Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?

On 6/5/11 3:51 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote: > On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: >> On 6/5/11 11:21 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: >>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier >>> wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>>

Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?

On 6/5/11 11:21 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: > On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier > wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I have tried to follow as much as emails as possible but it's >> overwhelming. Anyway I feel that several questions do not longer >> belong to the pre-incubation phase but sh

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache OGNL

On 4/8/11 7:06 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > I don't recall the Commons PMC saying the project needs to be renamed when it > voted to sponsor this project. If that is necessary I'm sure they will let > the project know. We voted to sponsor OGNL. Martin is right that our policy is to avoid the cute

Re: Voting waiting period

On 2/5/11 4:16 PM, Scott O'Bryan wrote: > Bertrand, > > I agree. The good thing about a vibrant community is that they > generally enforce this. All I'm saying is this shouldn't be a "must" > requirement, rather it should be a shall and we can let the individual > communities work out what except

Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation

Joe Schaefer wrote: > - Original Message > >> From: Phil Steitz >> To: general@incubator.apache.org >> Sent: Wed, December 30, 2009 3:10:47 PM >> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation >> >> Joe

Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation

Joe Schaefer wrote: > - Original Message > >> From: Phil Steitz >> To: general@incubator.apache.org >> Sent: Wed, December 30, 2009 1:30:13 PM >> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation >> >> Joe

Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation

Joe Schaefer wrote: > - Original Message > >> From: ant elder >> To: general@incubator.apache.org >> Sent: Fri, December 11, 2009 5:22:13 AM >> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation >> >> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Niall Pemberton >> wrote: >>> On

Re: [DISCUSS] Sanselan as a Commons library

Craig L Russell wrote: Hi, The Sanselan podling [1] has been incubating since 2007 and has achieved most of the goals in incubation: Code has been released [2] according to the incubator release guidelines Status is up to date [3] Community mailing lists are responded to promptly [5] JIRA iss

[Result] [Vote] Accept JRS project for incubation

This vote has passed. Incubator PMC (binding) 8 +1 votes (martinc, mvdb, pzf, jukka, brett, rdonkin, leosimons, clr) no - votes 5 +1 non-binding votes, no non-binding - votes I will start the process of making infrastructure requests and clearing IP. Thanks! Phil

[Vote] Accept JRS project for incubation

JRS would have its own release cycle, it should have its own JIRA project * Project Name: JRS * Project Key: JRS Initial set of committers --- * Brendan McCarthy (brendan_dot_mccarthy_at_ gorillalogic_dot_com) * Tony Ambrozie (tony_dot_a_dot_ambrozie_at_aexp_

Re: [Proposal] Java Resource Simulator (JRS)

On 6/24/07, Henning Schmiedehausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Is this a legal issue (you need clearance) or just a matter of "well, there are a bazillion of wrong/strange/bad license headers with (C)'s inside that we want to clean up first and need time"? We have clearance to execute a code gr

Re: [Proposal] Java Resource Simulator (JRS)

On 6/24/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What have others done to workaround the bootstrapping problem for code > that is currently internally licensed / restricted distribution before > the proposal is accepted and a grant can be executed? My understanding is that whether projec

Re: [Proposal] Java Resource Simulator (JRS)

On 6/24/07, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jun 24, 2007, at 8:24 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: > This is a proposal to develop a Java-based interface response > capture/playback tool. Interesting proposal. Seems useful. > Documentation > - > Document

[Proposal] Java Resource Simulator (JRS)

f committers --- * Brendan McCarthy (brendan_dot_mccarthy_at_ gorillalogic_dot_com) * Tony Ambrozie (tony_dot_a_dot_ambrozie_at_aexp_dot_com) * Phil Steitz (psteitz_at_apache_dot_org) * Ian Gray (ian_dot_d_dot_gray_at_aexp_dot_com) * Rahul Akolkar (rahul_at_apache_dot_org)

Re: [VOTE] Should we treat incubator releases differently to normal releases

On 3/21/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 3/19/07, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/15/07, Craig McClanahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If these are indeed going to be official releases, we should totally > > dispense with the requirements for "-incubating" i

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Synapse

On 12/26/06, Paul Fremantle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The Synapse incubator is therefore asking the Incubator PMC to graduate the Synapse project into the Apache Web Services PMC. Synapse heavily integrates with other WS projects including Axis2, Axiom, Sandesha, Rampart. Please send in your +

Request to be added to Incubator PMC

I would like to join the Incubator PMC. I am an ASF member and, pending a positive acceptance vote, will be serving as a mentor for the new "River" project. Thanks! Phil - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For addition

Re: [VOTE] Incubate new podling, "River" (nee Braintree, nee..., nee Jini)

+1 Phil On 12/20/06, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thursday 21 December 2006 11:46, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: [x] +1 Accept River as a new podling as described below [ ] -1 Do not accept the new podling (provide reason, please) non-binding. Cheers Niclas ---

[IP Clearnance] Jakarta Commons - Mantissa donation

The Jakarta Commons community has voted to accept a donation from Luc Maisonoble of the Mantissa math library, for inclusion in Jakarta Commons Math. The IP clearance form is checked into /ip-clearance as jakarta-commons-mantissa.xml. The source is here: http://www.spaceroots.org/software/mantis

Re: primary email, balanced use of IRC

On 6/23/06, David Crossley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Being there in real time is also difficult. This effectively cuts out a lot of people. For partly selfish reasons, I would hate to see apache projects trend toward more synchronous communications requirements. That is why the summary i

Re: [Proposal] Jini Project

On 6/22/06, Mark Brouwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Niclas Hedhman wrote: > On Wednesday 21 June 2006 19:19, Leo Simons wrote: > >> What I'm missing is an idea of the interaction between jini.org and this >> proposed new apache project, and an idea of the interaction between the JCP >> process an

Re: [Proposal] Jini Project

On 6/21/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Leo Simons wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 10:15:38AM -0400, Jim Hurley wrote: > > Let the records show that Geir is listed as initial committer too yet probably > doesn't work at sun, unless he switched companies again :) Hey, it's be

Re: [Proposal] Jini Project

+1 (as in "will help"). From the text below and the comments in , I assume that the scope of the project will just be the core infrastructure. But you also mention "related utilities and tools." Can you clarify a litt

Re: JDO2 Snapshots

Dittert, Eric wrote: From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 08, 2005 6:40 PM As I said, it is about balance. The community that we most care about during Incubation is the developer community, not the end-user community. I could go so far as to say that a bit of in

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache TSIK

+1 Phil Granqvist, Hans wrote: Proposal This is a proposal to submit the Trust Services Integration Toolkit (TSIK) to ASF. TSIK is a Java toolkit that VeriSign has been developing since 2001, and it is the basis of several products developed by VeriSign. The intent with Apache TS

RE: [VOTE] Directory exiting Incubator

[ X] Graduate the Directory Project [ ] Abstain [ ] Keep incubating the Directory Project --Phil - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [VOTE][release] [ApacheDS] 0.8

--- [X] +1 I support this release and am willing to help [ ] +0 I support this release but am unable to help [ ] -0 I do not support this release [ ] -1 I do not support this release, and here are my reasons --

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release [naming] 0.8

The vote on directory-dev to release a "technology preview" release of directory-naming 0.8 from the incubator has passed, with 6 +1 votes (Phil Steitz, Enrique Rodriguez, Brett Porter, Alex Karasulu, Stephen McConnell, Vince Tence) and one +0 (Niclas Hedhman). The full vote thre

Re: [VOTE] Directory project releases II

+1 Phil Alex Karasulu wrote: Hello again, It looks like lots of people are away and we're going to have to wait for some clarification on whether or not we can release kerberos, eve, janus, and seda as is or change their names. So in the mean time I think we can separately release the following

Re: [VOTE] Accept MyFaces for Incubation

Noel J. Bergman wrote: See: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/MyFacesProposal [X] Accept MyFaces into the Incubator One small comment: since Wiki pages can change at any time, in the future it might be best to have votes reference static html (or inlined) proposals instead of wiki pages. The +1 a

Re: PPMCs and oversight

A couple of times on this thread, Berin and others have pointed out that "regular status reporting" is not all that incubating projects need. I think that this is an important point. The ever-present, never-defined "oversight" term seems to imply more of an event interface -- "raise issues," "

Re: Add 'practice' PMC structure to projects in incubation

Noel J. Bergman wrote: Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: Committers could be given commit access long before having project member status, and would thus be able to commit but not vote. This makes it possible to keep a high bar for membership of the project but a lower bar for committing. Is this possibl

Re: Add 'practice' PMC structure to projects in incubation

Roy T. Fielding wrote: [Moved from the PMC list -- folks have got to stop proposing such things on the wrong list.] A long time ago, the name PMC was created in an attempt to genericize the way that the Apache Group operated, using terminology that would be easily understood by a judge or IRS inspe

Re: [PROPOSAL] PMC Vote to incubate Directory Project

Noel J. Bergman wrote: We should ask ourselves if we expect to provide a home for extended Perl, C or whatever APIs, naming services for those languages, etc. If the answer is "yes", then fine, we can all agree and move forward. my opinion is that standards-based Directory + Identity services co

Re: [PROPOSAL] PMC Vote to incubate Directory Project

See comments inline Noel J. Bergman wrote: I have no problem with protocol-centric projects, and no problem with language-centric projects, but I do have a problem with protocol-centric projects that assume one implementation language is "best". OK, I've seen enough language wars to understand y

Re: Getting the distribution onto a download site somewhere ...

Jochen Wiedmann wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: I am not on the Incubator PMC, but I feel that a project still bearing incubator status should not be permitted to make a Release. I do not know what exactly you define as a "release". Is that more than a distribution? An incubator project is expec

Re: [PROPOSAL] PMC Vote to incubate Directory Project

Roy T. Fielding wrote: Greg posted a message back on the 18th noting that a PMC vote on the entry of the project to the incubator would be kicked off under the private [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. I don't know the specifics of Incubator voting policies but I guessing we will see a vote result early

Re: [PROPOSAL] PMC Vote to incubate Directory Project

Stephen McConnell wrote: Phil: Greg posted a message back on the 18th noting that a PMC vote on the entry of the project to the incubator would be kicked off under the private [EMAIL PROTECTED] list. I don't know the specifics of Incubator voting policies but I guessing we will see a vote resu

Re: [PROPOSAL] PMC Vote to incubate Directory Project

I have been following this thread with interest and have found the discussion very informative. Thanks to all who have provided insight for those of us with less knowledge and experience with the Apache way. I have been a bit surprised by the lack of discussion about the merits of the proposal