Re: [vote] beehive v1 milestone 1 release

On 5/28/05, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eddie O'Neil wrote: > > > I'd thought that creating the installers from the branch would be > > sufficient preparation work. :) > > No. Sorry, but you really can't expect people to go searching for binaries > and assume that they are what

a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue

All-- There has been some confusion publicly and privately about the JSR 181 TCK issues and the WSM part of Beehive. The goals of WSM are to implement the JSR 181 specification and to provide a generic annotation processor for the 181 annotations. In addition, there is a layer that implement

Re: [vote] beehive v1 milestone 1 release

On May 28, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Eddie ONeil wrote: Putting [EMAIL PROTECTED] back on the thread. Noel, Geir, or Craig, can you confirm for everyone that we must pass the JSR 181 TCK before calling a release 1.0-final? Only if claiming compliance w/ JSR-181. JSR-181 is still working towar

Re: a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue

On May 29, 2005, at 8:21 AM, Eddie ONeil wrote: All-- There has been some confusion publicly and privately about the JSR 181 TCK issues and the WSM part of Beehive. The goals of WSM are to implement the JSR 181 specification and to provide a generic annotation processor for the 181 annota

Anyone want to contribute to Incubator site? :-)

I've made a few changes today to the site, but it really needs a review for best practice -- or at least current practice :-). Volunteers to at least read the site and point out things to be fixed, or better still to contribute improvements, would be appreciated. --- Noel --

Changes to new committers page

I have made some changes to the new committers page to better reflect practices, including Roy's resurrection of the private discussion/public vote approach. I wouldn't mind documenting it even as a preferred approach. In any event, please review. And, yes, it does not describe current practices

RE: a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue

Geir wrote: > Eddie ONeil wrote: > > I do think that we should complete the current milestone > > release in order to get something new out there. > If you are calling this a milestone increment rather than a real > "we're complete and support this" release Which they have to do anyway, since Bee

Re: Changes to new committers page

Hi Noel, Google "Apache JDO" and you get a hit for Apache OJB. You would never guess that we're building the API and TCK for JDO 2.0 here. Apache JDO has a sponsor, committers, a repository, a JIRA, and wiki pages. It's just not visible on the incubator pages. Can you or someone help fix th

Apache JDO

Craig Russell wrote: > Google "Apache JDO" and you get a hit for Apache OJB. You would never > guess that we're building the API and TCK for JDO 2.0 here. > Apache JDO has a sponsor, committers, a repository, a JIRA, and wiki > pages. It's just not visible on the incubator pages. > Can you or so

RE: Roller status?

Dave Johnson wrote: > I believe the Roller grant and all ICLAs have been sent in. I went back through my e-mail archives and found: - Anil Gangolli (independent) - David Johnson (Sun) - Henri Yandell (independent, also VP of Apache Jakarta) - Lance Lavandowska (independent) - Matt Raible (R

Re: Apache JDO

Hi Noel, On May 29, 2005, at 1:26 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: Craig Russell wrote: Google "Apache JDO" and you get a hit for Apache OJB. You would never guess that we're building the API and TCK for JDO 2.0 here. Apache JDO has a sponsor, committers, a repository, a JIRA, and wiki pages. It

RE: Roller status?

On Sun, 29 May 2005, Noel J. Bergman wrote: Are we ready to move mailing lists and start using Subversion? I had setup the SVN repository some time ago. Sam and Henri have access, and others will be added as the accounts are created. I also setup lists for -dev, -commits, -ppmc and -user