+1 (binding)
Regards,
Arvind Prabhakar
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Alejandro Abdelnur wrote:
> This is a call for vote to graduate Oozie podling from Apache Incubator.
>
> Oozie entered the Incubator in July of 2011. Since then it has added
> two new committers and made two significant rele
On 7/9/2012 11:19 AM, Richard Frovarp wrote:
A 0.2.0-incubating release candidate has been created. This will be
the second release of Apache Droids incubating.
We have 3 +1 votes, with 1 +1 IPMC vote (rfrovarp). We are in need of
2 more IPMC votes.
Vote thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.o
For the IPMC, just leave the vote open for at least 72 hours with no
specific close time. I might have time to look at it this afternoon for
your 3rd IPMC if no one beats me to it.
On Aug 8, 2012 2:48 AM, "Matthieu Morel" wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 8/7/12 4:30 PM, Richard Frovarp wrote:
> > On 08/07/
I'm not sure the vote passed. According to Patrick Hunt's message, we need 3 +1
IPMC votes, and we only have 2 +1 IPMC votes. The confusing perhaps comes from
this sentence in the podling release management manual:
"The vote passes if there are at least 3 +1's from the PPMC/IPMC members and
mor
On 07.08.2012 01:07, Gary Martin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to request the beginning of the vote for the first
> release Apache Bloodhound in the incubator following the successful
> vote by the Bloodhound PPMC. Two of the four +1 PPMC votes were from
> the IPMC members Greg Stein and Hyrum Wrig
On 7 August 2012 14:42, Flavio Junqueira wrote:
> I'm not sure the vote passed. According to Patrick Hunt's message, we need 3
> +1 IPMC votes, and we only have 2 +1 IPMC votes. The confusing perhaps comes
> from this sentence in the podling release management manual:
>
> "The vote passes if the
On 8/12/12 3:19 PM, Richard Frovarp wrote:
The vote did not pass, and he reopened it already. The vote was shy by 1
binding IPMC vote. I gave it a binding +1 a couple of days ago. It
should be good now, it just needs another result message, this time
showing the 3 IPMC votes.
Yes, and thanks Ri
Hi Antonio,
This is about making sure that all software being contributed to
Apache is covered by CLAs (continuous contribution) or the software
license grant (single contribution). Legally it would also be fine to
fork software under a Category A license, though it's frowned upon
(ie: the status
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Jul 7, 2012, at 10:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> The following projects haven't signed off on the copyright checklist item:
>>
>> 2009-02-09 kato
>> 2009-02-13 stonehenge
>> 2009-05-13 socialsite
>> 2010-05-19 amber
>> 2010-09-05
Henri,
Ant pointed out that Kato released. Where is the signoff you are looking at?
--benson
On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 7, 2012, at 10:22 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>>> The following projects haven
The vote did not pass, and he reopened it already. The vote was shy by 1
binding IPMC vote. I gave it a binding +1 a couple of days ago. It should
be good now, it just needs another result message, this time showing the 3
IPMC votes.
On Aug 12, 2012 4:50 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" wrote:
> I'm not su
On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:09 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 7 August 2012 14:42, Flavio Junqueira wrote:
>> I'm not sure the vote passed. According to Patrick Hunt's message, we need 3
>> +1 IPMC votes, and we only have 2 +1 IPMC votes. The confusing perhaps comes
>> from this sentence in the podling relea
12 matches
Mail list logo
