+1
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> The Lucene.Net community feels ready to graudate. Our internal vote was a
> success (~40 +1's and a bit of a mess because we had a number of mailing
> lists which spread our vote out - sorry about that spam). We had so
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Itamar Syn-Hershko wrote:
> That mail from Stephan got lost in my inbox, so I never followed up on
> that. I guess now would be a good chance to tie up all loose ends.
>
> How do I "do the ICLA"?
>
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 1:11 AM,
My understanding is that we can include the code as long as we have a
ICLA from Itamar. This was discussed at length in January for another
contribution that the same contributor wanted to donate. Stephan
(Bodewig, our Incubation mentor) laid out what needed to be done
really clearly in that contex
Regarding:
> I cannot read the tar.gz files with my normal tools (hexdump shows
> that they are in RAR format), and the hashes have got spurious lines
> in them which break automated checkers.
Looks like you guys are a) building the release packages on Windows,
and b) using Microsoft's FCIV tool t
All,
This vote passes with four (4) positive IMPC votes.
Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.2-incubating-RC2 will be officially released as
Apache Lucene.Net 2.9.2-incubating.
We sincerely appreciate everyone who contributed to making our first
release under our new status a success.
Thanks,
Troy
-
ice to include some sort of release notes or changes file
> within the distributions
>
> ...ant
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> I'm happy to announce that Lucene.Net 2.9.2-incubating-RC2 is
>> available and rea
Oops, typo!
"... and passes if a majority of at least three +1 Lucene.Net PMC
votes are cast."
should have been :
"... and passes if a majority of at least three +1 Incubator PMC votes
are cast."
Thanks,
Troy
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
>
All,
I'm happy to announce that Lucene.Net 2.9.2-incubating-RC2 is
available and ready for your testing and voting. This will be our
first release since returning to the Incubator. We look forward to
your input.
Release candidate artifacts:
http://people.apache.org/~thoward/Lucene.Net/2.9.2-incu
+1
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
> Given the feedback received so far I think the Rave proposal is in good
> shape so I'd like to bring up the vote for accepting Rave into the
> Incubator.
>
> The proposal is at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/RaveProposal and also
> copied
My point was:
Bill made a statement, which though rather neutral and ambiguous,
seemed to indicate that he (or perhaps a silent mass of others) did
not think the proposal was such a good idea, due to the risks
associated with a significant amount of corporate support and
involvement. At least, tha
b 24, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 24/02/2011 23:11, Troy Howard wrote:
>>
>> In my opinion, a reasonable compromise would be to set it as a project
>> goal to reduce corporate dependency on the committers list.
>
> I'm really confused where this is coming
In my opinion, a reasonable compromise would be to set it as a project
goal to reduce corporate dependency on the committers list.
I would take that so far as to treat it as a bug, place an issue in
JIRA to that effect, and schedule a date/version for the issue to be
resolved. This will remind eve
Good advice. Will do that.
Thanks,
Troy
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hi Troy,
>
> I think it would be good to send the below to trademarks@ and to start there.
>
> HTH,
> Chris
>
> On Feb 18, 2011, at 3:13 AM, Troy Howard wr
anks,
Troy
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:45 AM, Troy Howard wrote:
> All,
>
> We've recently been working to update the Lucene.Net website to
> reflect our new status as an Incubator Podling and just generally get
> up to date. During that process we have been discussing the p
All,
We've recently been working to update the Lucene.Net website to
reflect our new status as an Incubator Podling and just generally get
up to date. During that process we have been discussing the project
branding and logo.
The discussion can be found in the comments here:
https://issues.apach
; On 01/26/2011 10:05 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>
>> Since posting the Lucene.Net Incubator proposal announcement on Jan
>> 12th, we now have three mentors signed up and would like to call a
>> vote to accept Lucene.Net into the Apache Incubator.
>>
patches, documentation, and website enhancements. Three of
the other proposed initial committers, Troy Howard, Chris Currens and
Sergey Mirvoda are both already actively involved in other open source
projects, either as committers of code or in coordination roles. Troy,
Chris, Sergey and Prescott are c
ct: Re: [PROPOSAL] Lucene.Net return to the Incubator
>>
>> Troy,
>>
>> If you have the proposal done, the next thing to do would be to call a vote
>> to accept it.
>>
>> -Grant
>>
>> On Jan 20, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>
lp us out as Mentor?
Thanks,
Troy
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Troy Howard wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> Please review our proposal for moving the Lucene.Net project back to
>> the Incubator.
>
> I am happy to
n raw text form follows this email and the wiki is located here:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Lucene.Net%20Proposal
Thanks,
Troy Howard
= FINAL =
'''''Subitted on Wednesday, January 12th, 2011''''&#
20 matches
Mail list logo
