Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The thread has died down with no consensus, so I'm going to try again.
I apologize for being absent from these threads for the last month.
Life got busy and one of the things that got dropped was the incubator
general list.
I don't want to rehash ev
Robert, are you happy to +1 the release now?
On 6/19/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/16/07, Bruce Snyder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have have some questions that need answering before we can proceed
> with the release. Please them inline below:
>
> On 5/29/07, Gui
On 7/2/07, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert, are you happy to +1 the release now?
after checking this thread, my substantive issue was the bad signatures
if they've been updated, i'll take another look
- robert
As a new release with updated LICENSE file has been uploaded, all
signatures have been updated too.
I've just checked and they all seem ok.
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 7/2/07, James Strachan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Robert, are you happy to +1 the release now
On Sunday 01 July 2007 14:33, robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 6/30/07, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Maybe we should use that release notes as a template :)
>
> sounds like a good idea :-)
>
> i hope that daniel might find some time to help write the release
> management guide (
The Log4PHP restart proposal vote (http://thread.gmane.org/
gmane.comp.apache.incubator.general/15122) has been open for 72 hours
at this time and there have been +1 votes from Curt Arnold and Jim
Jagielski, both IPMC members. Additional votes or comments from
other IPMC members are desire
On 6/29/07, Curt Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...Revival of the terminated log4php incubation with a new development
community and a goal to migrate log4php to PHP 5
+1
-Bertrand
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PRO
Hi,
On Jul 2, 2007, at 2:10 AM, J Aaron Farr wrote:
Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The thread has died down with no consensus, so I'm going to try
again.
I apologize for being absent from these threads for the last month.
Life got busy and one of the things that got dropped w
Craig L Russell wrote:
>
> I agree that the Incubator should groom the PPMC toward self-governance.
> But that doesn't mean that the Incubator PMC can avoid its
> responsibilities.
+1
>> Thus I'm in favor of only ONE vote.
>
> That's why I proposed that a vote occur simultaneously on both priva
+1 (non binding)
Xavier
On 6/29/07, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have changed the proposal to indicate that initial source will not
be made available until the software grant is executed. Other than
that, the proposal is unchanged from the original submission. Full
text is attach
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
11 matches
Mail list logo
