RE: First Non-CVS snapshot of JaxMe

Jochen, There's been some recent progress in formalizing some of the requirements to create a public release. The Incubation Policy document is still somewhat under construction, but it is now linked from http://incubator.apache.org. The most relevant parts are the "Branding" [1] and "Releases"

RE: [RT] "We are under incubation" icon

Here's what we've done with XMLBeans for the last 5-6 months: Aside from the incubator banner on http://incubator.apache.org/projects/xmlbeans.html, we also have an incubator banner posted next to the XML project banner on the main project page at http://xml.apache.org/xmlbeans/. Cliff Tetsuya K

RE: [RT] How to graduate

Jim Jagielski wrote on Wednesday, January 21, 2004 11:48 AM: >> The Actual Graduation Procedure >> --- >> The important formal part is that the Incubator PMC votes (which >> happens according to the 'standard' apache policy of simple majority >> on non-technical votes,

PPMCs and Podling Releases

Prior to the PPMC discussion, we had agreed on a policy for podling releases. See http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases%0D%0A. More recently, the Lenya release was discussed, but this was also just prior to the PPMC debate. See http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrow

Setting up a PPMC list

I'd like to get a PPMC set up for XMLBeans. Here is what I think I need to ask infrastructure to do. Does this look right? LIST NAME: xmlbeans-ppmc INITIAL SUBSCRIBERS: XMLBeans committers + XML PMC members + Mentor + Shepard/Champion This assumes XMLBeans is landing within the XML project.

[STATUS] Apache XMLBeans Project

Status report from the XMLBeans PPMC Changes since last report in January: 1. Added Dutta Satadip as a committer 2. Released incubating-xmlbeans-1.0.2 after a thorough legal review 2a. after review of license issues: added jaxen to distribution, removed junit,

RE: [VOTE][RESULT] Release of incubating-xmlbeans-1.0.2

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Tuesday, May 11, 2004 8:54 PM: > Cliff, > >>> Please cast your vote for the release of xmlbeans v 1.0.2, >>> as it currently exists on http://apache.org/dist/xml/xmlbeans/. > > You should not be staging releases in www.apache.org/dist. Nothing > should be put there unti

FW: [VOTE][RESULT] Release of incubating-xmlbeans-1.0.2

wanted to give you all a heads up, before we send out the [ANN] email. Thanks, Cliff Cliff Schmidt wrote on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 4:39 AM: > The release of 1.0.2 passed! > > We received 9 binding +1 votes with no -1s. > > However, after the vote closed, Alek pointed out a bu

RE: PROJECT DONATION PROPOSAL: RAD system for internet applications

Hi Marcus, Here are a few ideas on how to proceed with your proposal: 1. Read http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html, particularly the "Proposal" section. 2. While that policy document is very useful, it unfortunately does not yet provide a short list of what should be in

RE: contributions and CLAs

Sam Ruby wrote on Thursday, May 06, 2004 4:28 AM: > Justin Mason wrote: >> Hi incubator folks -- >> >> I'm one of the PMC and devs on the SpamAssassin project. >> >> As we build up towards our first ASF release, we have a few >> contributions from non-committers in our bugzilla that are ready to

[PROPOSAL] Beehive

Incubator PMC folks, I would like to propose a new Apache project named Beehive. The proposal can be found at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeehiveProposal. Since the project is being proposed as a TLP with three subprojects, I've requested that the Board consider this proposal at their next

RE: [PROPOSAL] Beehive

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Monday, May 17, 2004 6:10 PM: >> I would like to propose a new Apache project named Beehive. > > LOL I think you just did. :-) [Sorry, I use the same turn of > phrase. I still find it amusing. :-)] got me! -- I usually catch myself before doing that. I think next t

RE: [PROPOSAL] Beehive

Berin Lautenbach wrote on Thursday, May 20, 2004 4:16 AM: > +1 - with some reservations/questions. > > 1. I tried to find it, but I couldn't find a definitive answer to > Noel's question RE mailing lists? (I'd note that it is very easy to > add more mailing lists and split things out at any poi

RE: [VOTE] Graduate Geronimo from Incubator and recommend as top-level project

+1 (non-binding) Thanks to Geronimo for the effort you all went through in applying some of the new Incubator concepts, such as the PPMC. You helped lead a path for the rest of us. Cliff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTE

TLPs, Incubation, and the Board (was RE: [PROPOSAL] Beehive)

Cliff Schmidt wrote on Monday, May 17, 2004 7:30 PM: > Noel J. Bergman wrote on Monday, May 17, 2004 6:10 PM: >>> Since the project is being proposed as a TLP with three subprojects, >>> I've requested that the Board consider this proposal at their next >&

RE: Request creation of new mailing lists

Thanks to both of you. I've gotten behind on a few things while traveling over the last week. I'll get some things started in this coming week (including setting up the web site and dealing with various initial committer set-up issues). Thanks, Cliff Berin Lautenbach wrote on Sunday, May 30

RE: The 50% Rule (was RE: [Summary ]Re: [TEST+VOTE] Lenya 1.2 Release)

Roy T. Fielding wrote on Friday, June 11, 2004 2:24 PM: > On Friday, June 11, 2004, at 04:01 AM, Leo Simons wrote: > >> [is the rule that a project just needs 3 independent committers, or >> is there an additional rule that no more than 50% of the committers >> must be part of a single company?]

RE: The 50% Rule (was RE: [Summary ]Re: [TEST+VOTE] Lenya 1.2 Release)

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Sunday, June 13, 2004 4:31 PM: > Cliff Schmidt wrote: >> Roy T. Fielding wrote: >>> Leo Simons wrote: >>>> [is the rule that a project just needs 3 independent committers, or >>>> is there an additional rule that no more than 50

RE: The 50% Rule (was RE: [Summary ]Re: [TEST+VOTE] Lenya 1.2 Release)

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Monday, June 14, 2004 12:14 PM: > Jim Jagielski wrote: >> Noel J. Bergman wrote: >>> Leo Simons wrote: Roy T. Fielding wrote: > I have no idea where that 50% stuff came from. me neither! But I figure it was added for /some/ reason :-D >>> >>> IMO, ther

RE: The 50% Rule

Leo Simons wrote on Monday, June 14, 2004 4:01 PM: > Cliff Schmidt wrote: >> The more quantitative it is, the more a new project can know what >> they have ahead of them and the less familiarity with the project's >> community is required to cast an informed vote on g

RE: The 50% Rule

Roy T. Fielding wrote on Monday, June 14, 2004 3:40 PM: >> Personally, I'd like to see one or two quantitative rules (such as >> one about independent committers to allow for vetoes) and then leave >> the rest up to a voting body that will evaluate graduation against >> some general guidelines. I

RE: The 50% Rule (was RE: [Summary ]Re: [TEST+VOTE] Lenya 1.2 Release)

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Monday, June 14, 2004 11:46 PM: >> 6 BEA-employed committers + 5 independent committers > >> I think there is definitely sufficient community interest to keep the >> project going; however, it would probably move a lot slower if BEA >> were to drop XMLBeans today. > > Un

RE: [VOTE] Lenya 1.2 incubation distribution

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Thursday, June 17, 2004 12:11 PM: >> Is it already possible to end and summarize this vote? > > There is a request that we approve clearly marked incubation > distribution of Lenya to help further community development. The > request has the support for Steven Noels and

RE: Anyone wants to incubate MyFaces?

I certainly understand your concern here, Martin. According to our current Incubator policy document (http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases%0A), for an incubating project to create a release: 1. the release archive MUST contain the word "incubating" in the filen

RE: Anyone wants to incubate MyFaces?

BTW, I should probably point out that I'm not a member of the Incubator PMC, just a guy who's been through this process and cares about making it easier. So, take this as my opinion based on experience and interpretation of the policy documents -- not an official PMC answer. Cli

[VOTE] Graduate XMLBeans from Incubator and recommend as top-level project

The XMLBeans project has been actively developed in incubation for about 10 months. During this time, the user and developer community has continued to grow stronger, both in number, diversity, and degree of cooperation. In addition, the XMLBeans project has demonstrated an understanding and

RE: Errors generating site

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Saturday, June 19, 2004 1:30 PM: > I tried to generate the site, and ran into the following: > > X [0] projects/log4php BROKEN: No pipeline matched request: > projects/site:projects/log4php > X [0] projects/xmlbeans.html BROKEN: Couldn't accept input softbreak > ["\

RE: Download location for Incubator distributions

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Sunday, June 20, 2004 10:44 AM: >> As per Cliff's previous email, files will be moved on >> www.apache.org/dist and the XMLBeans website will be updated. > > Since XMLBeans appears to be about to leave the Incubator, this > needn't apply to it, but as we examine Incubator

RE: [VOTE] Graduate XMLBeans from Incubator and recommend as top-level project

I should probably vote myself... Cliff Schmidt wrote on Friday, June 18, 2004 6:59 PM: > I request that members of the XMLBeans PPMC (which includes the > Incubator PMC, the XML PMC, and the XMLBeans PMC committers) > please vote : > > [X] +1 - The XMLBeans project has met t

[RESULT] [VOTE] Graduate XMLBeans from Incubator and recommend as top-level project

Vote thread: http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&by=thread&from=805470 In support: Eric Vasilik Ted Leung Cliff Schmidt Nicola Ken Barozzi Leo Simons Roy T. Fielding Geir Magnusson Jr Noel J. Bergman Lawrence Moroney Berin Lautenbach Dain Sundstrom

RE: cvs commit: incubator/site/projects xmlbeans.cwiki

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Monday, June 28, 2004 10:53 PM: > Cliff, > > I'm not sure we want to delete all the content. Just move it to the > successful part of the projects page, and leave the content as a > record of what had happened. Mind you, nothing is lost, since the > page is maintained i

RE: cvs commit: incubator/site/projects xmlbeans.cwiki

Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote on Tuesday, June 29, 2004 12:30 AM: > Cliff Schmidt wrote: > >> Noel J. Bergman wrote on Monday, June 28, 2004 10:53 PM: >> >>> Cliff, >>> >>> I'm not sure we want to delete all the content. Just move it to the >&

RE: proposal: modify incubation application process to require a reference to the code itself

Brian Behlendorf wrote on Thursday, July 08, 2004 6:35 PM: > In walking through the incubation documents (helping a couple of > groups who have asked me about how to do this) it struck me that > there was no requirement that the proposal provide a link to download > and evaluate the code around wh

RE: [VOTE] Accept MyFaces for Incubation

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Friday, July 09, 2004 7:23 AM: > See: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/MyFacesProposal > > [X] Accept MyFaces into the Incubator > [ ] Reject MyFaces > > Vote ends Midnight EDT (between Monday and Tuesday), Monday July 12, > 2004. Cliff ---

Beehive initial code drop

(moving discussion to incubator general list - others may be interested in the outcome of this decision, as an example of how one company does a software grant.) Roy T. Fielding wrote on Thursday, July 15, 2004 4:45 PM: > Actually, for legal reasons, it would be better for Apache not to > have t

Beehive Status Report

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Sunday, July 18, 2004 2:28 PM: > Your quarterly > report is now overdue. Please provide it ASAP. It need not be > lengthy. Here's a really quick status update from a really new project: * Beehive's initial source code contribution was made on Friday, 19 July. * All m

RE: Beehive Status Report

ode parallels to the software grant), we should now update the copyright header to read the usual thing. Cliff > On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 10:53:41 -0700, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> Noel J. Bergman wrote on Sunday, July 18, 2004 2:28 PM: >> >>&g

RE: [STATUS] (incubator) Wed Jul 21 23:45:19 EDT 2004

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Wednesday, July 21, 2004 11:50 PM: >> Can we drop off this posting of a status file that is not and AFAIK >> will not be very live? > > I've been meaning to find and fix it. Why was this process started > in the first place? I thought the idea was that *if* we were keep

RE: PR issues (was: several messages)

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Friday, July 23, 2004 12:54 PM: > Without wanting to mention names, I agree with Brian about the > problem, but also observe that this has happened with the source > having been visible prior to Incubation. So that's why I separate > those two issues, and concur with a go

RE: [VOTE] Accept JCR for Incubation

Roy T. Fielding wrote on Wednesday, August 25, 2004 11:53 AM: > Here is the current text of the JCR proposal from > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/JcrProposal > > Please cast your vote as +1 (yes), -1 (no), or something in between. > Vote ends 12pm (Noon) PDT -0700, Saturday, August 28,

RE: [VOTE] Accept iBATIS for Incubation

+1 Clinton Begin wrote on Sunday, August 22, 2004 9:53 PM: > See: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IbatisProposal > > [ ] Accept iBATIS into the Incubator > [ ] Reject iBATIS - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For addi

RE: [Proposal] Switch to SVN

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Tuesday, September 14, 2004 12:17 AM: > As with all of the other messages I've seen so far, I agree with > switching the incubator CVS module to SVN, and making Subversion a > strong recommendation, but not a requirement, for projects. +1, excellent plan! ---

RE: Derby code copyright question

Noel J. Bergman wrote on Wednesday, September 15, 2004 12:09 AM: > Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > >> I've been lurking on the Derby list, and there's a discussion >> about code copyright. Why isn't all the code (c) ASF? > > The files should all have the AL v2. The license file provided > includes

RE: [VOTE] Remove the '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' mailing list (was [Proposal]...)

Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote on Friday, October 08, 2004 1:08 AM: > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: >> >> For "small" projects we have created a common >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list. >> >> Over time I haven't seen that a common list is needed, as all common >> requests go to the general mailing list.

STATUS: Beehive

Status file is up to date; see http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/projects/beehive.cwiki, or http://incubator.apache.org/projects/beehive.html when site is regenerated) Code & Infrastructure - initial code drop was made in mid-July. Ongoing development is very a

RE: Castle proposal

Sorry for the late reply. I thought it was more appropriate to reply to this thread rather than the [VOTE] thread if I was primarily asking a question/voicing a concern... >From the proposal and a quick look at the SF sites, I get the impression that there isn't much of a community behind this

Improving Incubator documentation (was RE: [OT] How to prevent abusing Apache priviliges)

I gave a 45-minute presentation on Apache and the Incubator at the O'Reilly Open Source Convention last July. If it's any use, you can download the slides at: http://conferences.oreillynet.com/cs/os2004/view/e_sess/5439 (.ppt format -- if there's any interest I can convert to html or .pdf).

RE: Mentor and Project Guide (WAS: RE: [OT] How to prevent...)

Resending same post under the other renamed thread. My previous post unintentionally started a second renamed thread -- didn't notice this one ("Mentor and Project Guide") until after I sent it. Cliff Cliff Schmidt wrote on Tuesday, October 19, 2004 7:23 PM: > I gave a 45-m

RE: Derby release

Samuel Andrew McIntyre wrote on Wednesday, October 20, 2004 12:26 AM: > (resending original request to [EMAIL PROTECTED], my > apologies) Thanks, Andrew. No need to apologize; it's common for someone to assume that issues of interest to the PMC should be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ;-) We just t

RE: Release of Agila

Geir Magnusson Jr wrote on Saturday, October 23, 2004 11:49 AM: > 1) Release : we can't really do a release while in incubator, but we > can certainly do milestone feature sets, which may be good enough for > you Geir, Just to make sure we're all on the same page here (and just for the enjoyment

RE: What to do with FTPServer and AltRMI

Adding my $0.02. IANAL, just a guy who deals with this stuff a lot: Stefano Mazzocchi wrote on Wednesday, November 03, 2004 10:11 AM: > J Aaron Farr wrote: > >> Let's say a group of developers bring an LGPL'd project to Apache >> called JExample from jexample.sf.net. > > Ok. > >> So they co

RE: What to do with FTPServer and AltRMI

Niclas Hedhman wrote on Wednesday, November 03, 2004 11:36 AM: > On Thursday 04 November 2004 02:11, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: > >>> What about code that was contributed during Incubation? >> >> They would have to obtain a license from the ASF to use that code, >> or, in alternative, a license fr

RE: [VOTE] Nutch

On Tuesday, January 04, 2005 11:09 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Doug proposed this a week and change ago (bad timing to do such > things around major holidays :-)). So far we have support from Dain, > Nicola Ken, Doug, Eric Hatcher, Henning, Roy and myself. > > Roy, Nicola Ken, and myself prov

RE: [PROPOSAL] Lucene4c

Garrett, You're right that all new code bases should come through the Incubator. However, the appropriate PMC to vote on whether it should be accepted into the incubator is the sponsoring PMC, which in this case appears to be the Lucene PMC. (The Incubator PMC does sponsor some projects, usually

Incubation, healthy communities, and the Apache brand (long)

Here are my $0.02 on the reasons for the incubation process: Thanks to those who came long before me (particularly the httpd folks), the Apache brand is incredibly strong. There are literally millions of users of Apache products who believe that they are making a good choice by simply building on

RE: Ruby Lucene port - directly under Lucene TLP?

On Wednesday, March 16, 2005 8:05 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > If an existing TLP, such as Lucene, wants to develop a port, such > > as a Ruby port of the Lucene library, can the Lucene PMC invite > > that port and its developers under its wings directly > > > this port is not an existing exter

RE: Volunteer Documentation

On Wednesday, March 16, 2005 7:47 PM, Vikas Singhal wrote: > Hi List, > > I am a technical writer with an experience of more than three years. > I want to contribute to the foundation in terms of documentation. > > I am willing to work on projects that either have no documentation or > minimal

RE: help wanted?

Steve, You might also want to take a look at http://apache.org/dev/, particularly http://apache.org/dev/contributors.html and http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html. After you've had a chance to look those documents over, I would start by picking the project you are most interested in and

Re: Prepping for Derby graduation vote

It sounds like people involved with the project are happy with the user community and the process being followed by the Derby committers, and it's great they've added a committer since starting Incubation. However, the committer diversity issue has been raised as an issue by at least a couple folk

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Derby from the incubator

On 4/18/05, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Brian Behlendorf wrote: > > > > Wouldn't "how can we increase the number of new developers on Derby while > > still in incubation" a better question to ask? > > I think only if the answer to 'do

Re: Prepping for Derby graduation vote

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 21:44:40 -0500, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cliff Schmidt wrote: > > the committer diversity issue has been raised as an issue by > > at least a couple folks. While it looks like they meet the > > requirement to have committers from

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Derby from the incubator

On 4/22/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe we should look for an additional metric for community health and > diversity for next time. It could be in addition to the "rule of 3", > but I think this example shows where we can improve things to help > ensure healthy communiti

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Derby from the incubator

On 4/22/05, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The three independent committers rule is an absolute minimum > based on the legal fact that US employees are required to be > loyal to their full-time employer *even* when we know the people > involved are beyond question, independently minde

Re: PROPOSAL : Apache Harmony - J2SE 5 Project

On 5/6/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear Incubator PMC : > > We, the sponsoring members listed below, ask that you accept the > following proposal for a new project at Apache, an effort centered > around architecting and implementing J2SE 5. +1 Cliff -

Re: Incubator - Sandbox

On 5/13/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On May 13, 2005, at 3:46 AM, Martin Marinschek wrote: > > The problem is that many components for JSF are developed outside of > > Apache, some by small independent developers, some at sourceforge, > > some in large corporations, and we

Re: Proposal for STDCXX

Heidi, This looks great. A few notes/questions inline below. Cliff On 5/13/05, Heidi Buelow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Proposal for an Apache-run version of the C++ Standard Library > Rogue Wave Software will jump start this project by contributing the > commercial C++ Standard Library

Re: STDCXX voting summary

I also didn't vote, but would vote +1. Maybe I'm too much of a stickler for process, but I was waiting for a [VOTE] email to follow-up on the "Proposal" thread. Although I realize it's not uncommon for a proposal thread to end up looking a lot like a bunch of votes. Cliff On 5/19/05, Heidi Buel

Re: [POLL] Apollo, Hermes, Muse

Sounds good to me, knowing that you (as the mentor) approve of the release, and assuming the incubation release branding guidelines are being followed. Thanks for the note. I think some prefer to see votes for releases done on this list, but I'm personally fine with a note like this and the actua

Re: [POLL] Apollo, Hermes, Muse

On 5/25/05, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not on the incubator PMC .. but, if I may, do these projects meet > the min. of 3 "other" committers requirement? dims, After a second reading, I see how Sajiva and I could have different interpretations of your question. I assume

Re: releasing from incubator? -- was: Re: a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue

Here is my opinion on the whole release issue, which has not changed in 18 months since the first big discussion of releases and incubation branding. Full Disclosure: While this is my opinion as a member of the Incubator PMC, it is not necessarily the consensus of the PMC. In addition, I was onc

Re: releasing from incubator? -- was: Re: a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue

On 6/7/05, Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Minimum+Exit+Requirements > > > Note: incubator projects are not permitted to issue an official Release. > Test snapshots (however good the quality) and Release plans are OK

Re: releasing from incubator? -- was: Re: a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue

On 6/7/05, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It just doesn't make sense to me to tell a community that believes it has >> a "1.0" quality product that they have to call it a "test snapshot". > > Demo? Technology preview? Milestone? Happy Meal? All of those terms (or at least the fi

Re: releasing from incubator? -- was: Re: a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue

On 6/8/05, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > FWIW, versioning schemes such as: > > M.mQB > > where M == major, m == minor, Q in [D:Development, A:Alpha, B:Beta, > R:Release], and B == Build# encode the release type. I supposed that 1.0m1 > represents a milestone. > > In any event, I

Re: releasing from incubator? -- was: Re: a beehive release and the JSR 181 TCK issue

On 6/11/05, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Richard Feit wrote: > > This is just a case where we need all the input we can get. > > We'll see if we can get some additional mentoring for you. I believe that > we'll have another volunteer to also spend time helping beehive along. :-)

XMLBeans PMC has voted to sponsor xmlbeanscxx

l-xmlbeanscxx > > (3.3) Bugzilla > > xml xmlbeanscxx > > (4.0) identify the initial set of committers > > This is a preliminary list that will be updated with volunteer members. > > Tim Triemstra (TimT @ RogueWave dot-com) > John Hinke (Hinke @ RogueWave dot-com) >

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Beehive into a TLP

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 7/12/05, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear Incubator PMC, > > I believe Beehive is ready to function as a standalone PMC. Please see > the latest status at: > http://incubator.apache.org/projects/beehive.html +1 - - The Beehiv

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Beehive into a TLP

On Jul 14, 2005, at 4:49 PM, Simon Kitching wrote: Yes the current discussion on legal-discuss is wrt wss4j, but the question for beehive was more general: are there any patents that have been explicitly granted for the use of Beehive? This is not how the question should be asked. The questio

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Beehive into a TLP

On 7/18/05, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Noel, > Cliff is driving the pmc selection/vp recommendation process. > > Cliff, > Could you please respond? Sure -- I'll follow up my earlier thread on the beehive ppmc list re: board resolution and VP candidate. Cliff > > thanks, > di

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Graduate Derby as sub-project of Apache DB

On 7/25/05, Daniel John Debrunner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Daniel John Debrunner wrote: > > > So please vote on graduating Derby to a sub-project of Apache DB. > > Passed with eleven (11) +1 votes (including one ++1 vote :-) > > Three (3) members of the Incubator PMC voted +1 (Noel, Geir, Ro

Re: JDO2 Snapshots

On 8/7/05, Jochen Wiedmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/7/05, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Please note that although we have attempted to establish a balanced policy, > > it is not our goal to have widespread adoption of projects that are still in > > the Incubator. We wa

Incubating Project Releases (was Re: JDO2 Snapshots)

On 8/8/05, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't mind an incubating project making verifiable releases with > proper voting and the appropriate disclaimers. I completely agree, and I believe this is exactly what projects want to do. Are there any PMC members who disagree with Roy's

Re: Incubating Project Releases (was Re: JDO2 Snapshots)

On 8/10/05, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cliff Schmidt wrote: > > On 8/8/05, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>I don't mind an incubating project making verifiable releases with > >>proper voting and the appropriate disc

Re: Incubating Project Releases (was Re: JDO2 Snapshots)

On 8/16/05, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cliff Schmidt wrote: > > On 8/10/05, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Cliff Schmidt wrote: > >> > >>>On 8/8/05, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > &g

a few steps before approving a project

I'd like to suggest a few changes to the process of approving new project proposals. The purpose of these changes would be to allow the ASF to consider big picture issues related to the acceptance of new projects into the Incubator, which isn't as likely to happen with our current set of rules whe

Re: a few steps before approving a project

On 8/31/05, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 11:01 -0700, Cliff Schmidt wrote: > > BTW, the XMLBeans PMC just voted to add a single member to the PMC, > > and even that required a 72-hour wait after getting Board > > acknowledge

Re: a few steps before approving a project

On 8/31/05, Sanjiva Weerawarana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 11:43 -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > > The Incubator's charter from the board says: > > > > > > RESOLVED, that the Apache Incubator PMC be and hereby i

Re: [VOTE] Proposal for Tobago, an Apache MyFaces subproject

Yes, but don't take my personal thoughts/proposals to be policy. Matthias is right that the current policy does not require an Incubator PMC vote. Cliff On 8/31/05, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, > > as Cliff has just pointed out, that should not be enough, at least in >

Re: a few steps before approving a project

Remember that putting "code" through incubation (as opposed to a "community") can be a really fast process -- as fast as someone can give a solid account to the Incubator PMC of the audit trail of the code. But, yes -- it sounds like such a thing probably should have been brought through the Incub

Re: a few steps before approving a project

On 9/1/05, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --On September 1, 2005 10:50:20 AM -0700 Cliff Schmidt > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > If the answer to one or more of the questions was not simply "yes", > > then there might be another

Recent Incubator proposals ( was Re: a few steps before approving a project)

(renaming the subject to try to keep the past flames and future discussions somewhat separate) On 9/1/05, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There was ONLY one press release...that was vetted by the [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Please > complain to the folks there. Actually, there were at leas

Re: a few steps before approving a project

Dims, With all due respect for your frustration and its expression (I'm actually not being sarcastic), could you also respond to the subject of this thread and possibly the thoughts that started it? I was really hoping this could remain a discussion of the pros and cons of things along those line

Re: a few steps before approving a project

Thanks, Dims -- I really appreciate the response! Comments and responses to your questions below. Cliff On 9/1/05, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please see below: > > On 8/31/05, Cliff Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - change the Incubator PM

Re: [VOTE] Proposal for Tobago, an Apache MyFaces subproject

On 9/5/05, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/6/05, Martin Marinschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, I didn't argument against using the incubator infrastructure. > > > > Nobody seemed too interested here, though (in contradiction to the > > MyFaces community, who was very intereste

Re: New project

This list is one place to submit proposals, but see the Incubator Process document for more details: see http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Process_Description.html#Establishment. Cliff On 11/11/05, Federico Paparoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi i would like to suggest a new project for t

Re: [VOTE] @domain for Incubator mailing lists

On 12/17/05, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Please vote on the following: > > New mailing lists should be created under the > @incubator.apache.org domain, just as all of > the other project resources, e.g., the web > site and SVN subtree. -0, and here's why: - I think ident

Re: AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal

Adam, Can you tell me if you considered proposing this to the Eclipse Foundation? Since this project appears to have far stronger dependencies on Eclipse Foundation projects rather than anything from Apache, can you tell me why you think bringing this project here is likely to help you build a st

Re: AJAX Toolkit Framework Proposal

On 12/20/05, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mike, > > Some one comes to ASF with a proposal, typically we give it our full > consideration. I can understand why cliff asked about eclipse option > (Beehive/Eclipse stuff!), Actually, I had two purposes behind my question. One was to

Re: Is the incubator out of control?

On 12/21/05, Ian Holsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ted Leung wrote: > > > > On Dec 21, 2005, at 8:22 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > > > >> > >>> I think that the incubation process is setting an incredibly > >>> low bar for access to the Apache brand name > >> > >> And we require disclaimers and

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Jackrabbit to TLP status (pending board approval)

On 3/12/06, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The Apache Jackrabbit committers have voted to request graduation > from the Incubator as a TLP. > Please send in your +1/0/-1 to approve/abstain/disapprove. +1 Cliff -

Re: Mistaken copyrights

On 4/5/06, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In the WebWork2 podling, we have several files that contain a copyright > header naming the file as belonging to the ePlus corporation. Turns out, > this copyright was mistakenly applied due a developer's mistaken IDEA > configuration, which was se

  1   2   >