Ooops. I fell into the trap of making a general observation in a message
with a log4net subject line. My bad.
I'll follow up with another message with a new subject line.
At 04:29 PM 3/16/2005, you wrote:
> Apache is indeed an interesting place, although the incubator is not
> necessarily repres
> Apache is indeed an interesting place, although the incubator is not
> necessarily representative of the whole.
What happens in the Incubator informs and seeds the next generation of ASF
communities. This suggests to me that every active ASF Member, Officer and
Director should be involved in th
Apache is indeed an interesting place, although the incubator is not
necessarily representative of the whole.
At 03:43 PM 3/16/2005, Nicko Cadell wrote:
It has been an interesting and informative experience.
Thanks for all your efforts.
Nicko
--
Ceki Gülcü
The complete log4j manual: http://www.
It has been an interesting and informative experience.
Thanks for all your efforts.
Nicko
> -Original Message-
> From: Ceki Gülcü [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 16 March 2005 10:14
> To: general@logging.apache.org
> Cc: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: log4net 1.2.9 beta relea
David Crossley wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > > The Status Report is still not published. I sent a note to this
> > > list a couple of days ago about your recent changes breaking the
> > > documentation build.
> >
> > David, what do we need to get this fixed and going? If it is a simple
> >
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > The Status Report is still not published. I sent a note to this
> > list a couple of days ago about your recent changes breaking the
> > documentation build.
>
> David, what do we need to get this fixed and going? If it is a simple
> syntax fix, do you have time to do i
> The Status Report is still not published. I sent a note to this
> list a couple of days ago about your recent changes breaking the
> documentation build.
David, what do we need to get this fixed and going? If it is a simple
syntax fix, do you have time to do it?
--- Noel
Ceki G?lc? wrote:
> Given that there seem to be no remaining objections for releasing a
> snapshot of log4net, as already mentioned in [1], I intend to report
> back to the LS PMC that the Incubator PMC approves a snapshot release
> for log4net 1.2.9 beta. If I am misjudging the overall sentiment
Given that there seem to be no remaining objections for releasing a
snapshot of log4net, as already mentioned in [1], I intend to report
back to the LS PMC that the Incubator PMC approves a snapshot release
for log4net 1.2.9 beta. If I am misjudging the overall sentiment of
this PMC, please correc
Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
> Nicko Cadell wrote:
> > While we are actively working towards meeting the exit requirements we
> > currently feel that it would benefit the project greatly to make a
> > development (beta) release available now.
> There is at least one precedent.
There is plenty of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Nicko Cadell wrote:
>
> While we are actively working towards meeting the exit requirements we
> currently feel that it would benefit the project greatly to make a
> development (beta) release available now.
There is at least one precedent. Derby made a releas
> Knowing log4X does not necessarily mean knowledge of log4Y, especially to
> the extent of taking over a project if and when the need arises.
> Would you care to clarify what you mean exactly by the term "taking
> responsibility"?
The ASF does not exist to sponsor projects with a lifespan measur
Noel,
You have raised the exact same legitimate concern about log4cxx.
Knowing log4X does not necessarily mean knowledge of log4Y, especially to
the extent of taking over a project if and when the need arises. As such,
having the LS PMC project take responsibility for log4cxx or log4net would
be
At 09:46 PM 3/10/2005, Roy T.Fielding wrote:
| -..-.. | Add all active committers in the STATUS file.
The STATUS.txt file should be updated by Nicko within the next few days.
is done and the logging PMC is ready to accept responsibility,
then I think log4net should graduate from incubator. +1
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> Assuming you can also confirm that
> | -..-.. | Add all active committers in the STATUS file.
> is done and the logging PMC is ready to accept responsibility,
> then I think log4net should graduate from incubator. +1
Does Logging PMC have a community ready to take re
On Mar 10, 2005, at 2:20 AM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
Roy et al.,
Done. I committed the updates yesterday as shown by the SVN
notification message below. I now go on and update the section about
3rd party libraries.
I would say that all IP concerns related to log4net have been
addressed. Would you con
Roy et al.,
Done. I committed the updates yesterday as shown by the SVN notification
message below. I now go on and update the section about 3rd party libraries.
I would say that all IP concerns related to log4net have been addressed.
Would you concur?
> Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:18:56 -
>
On Mar 9, 2005, at 3:00 AM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
At 01:39 AM 3/9/2005, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
See Roy's message about the need to update the status file. One would
expect that this is simply an oversight, and that the Logging PMC did
not
vote for a release with IP issues still open.
Indeed, the soft
To summarize:
1) The foundation records attest that a software grant for log4net has been
received by the foundation.
2) All log4net committers have sent in their signed CLAs.
3) All code in the logging-log4net CVS repository is Apache licensed.
4) Log4net does not depend on any third party libra
The foundation records attest that a software grant has been signed by
Richard Hobbs of Neoworks Limited for the log4net source code. Public
mailing lists indicate that this was done around 2004-01-26 after which the
software was imported into the logging-log4net CVS repository.
The foundation
At 01:39 AM 3/9/2005, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
See Roy's message about the need to update the status file. One would
expect that this is simply an oversight, and that the Logging PMC did not
vote for a release with IP issues still open.
Indeed, the software grant was sent to Jim sometime in January
> On Mar 7, 2005, at 8:05 AM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
> > Is there any opposition or reservations in relation to the log4net
> > snapshot release mentioned by Nicko and myself a few days ago?
> >
> > If not could we allow log4net to move forward?
>
> If the subproject has cleared its IP issues suffic
> You expect someone to RTFM? ;-) Yes, there should be a
> README or similar notice file in both the directory and the package.
I have added a readme with the incubation disclaimer and updated the
test package.
Nicko
-
To
Nicko Cadell wrote:
> What form must the disclaimer take?
The form you found in the Incubation Policy documentation.
> The incubation disclaimer is on the front page of the documentation
> included with the package, in the doc/index.html file. Is this not
> prominently displayed enough? must we
eing release?
Many thanks,
Nicko
> -Original Message-
> From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 08 March 2005 16:07
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: log4net 1.2.9 beta release
>
> Nicko,
>
> The package must include, as must the
On Mar 7, 2005, at 8:05 AM, Ceki Gülcü wrote:
Is there any opposition or reservations in relation to the log4net
snapshot release mentioned by Nicko and myself a few days ago?
If not could we allow log4net to move forward?
If the subproject has cleared its IP issues sufficient to make
a release,
Nicko,
The package must include, as must the directory, the incubation disclaimer.
--- Noel
-Original Message-
From: Nicko Cadell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 17:37
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: log4net 1.2.9 beta release
Dear
Ping.
At 05:05 PM 3/7/2005, you wrote:
Hello,
Is there any opposition or reservations in relation to the log4net
snapshot release mentioned by Nicko and myself a few days ago?
If not, could we allow log4net to move forward?
Many thanks in advance,
--
Ceki Gülcü
--
Hello,
Is there any opposition or reservations in relation to the log4net snapshot
release mentioned by Nicko and myself a few days ago?
If not could we allow log4net to move forward?
Many thank in advance,
At 11:37 PM 3/4/2005, Nicko Cadell wrote:
Dear Incubator,
I have created a test package wh
Dear Incubator,
I have created a test package which can be downloaded from here:
http://www.apache.org/~nicko/log4net/
If this is not the correct place to publish a preview please let me know.
As I understand it, once the release is approved, it should be published at:
/www/cvs.apache.org/dist/
30 matches
Mail list logo
