RE: [PROPOSAL] Silk as new Incubator project

below -Original Message- From: dwhyt...@gmail.com [mailto:dwhyt...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Donald Whytock Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 13:52 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Silk as new Incubator project On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrot

RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Calcite 0.9.1 (incubating)

rust) certifications of the keys association with a committer are updated automatically. That includes any revocations. -- Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org+1-206-779-9430 https://keybase.io/orcmid PGP F96E 89FF D456 628A X.509 certs used and requested for signed

RE: Convenience Binary Policy

in-line. -Original Message- From: br...@apache.org [mailto:br...@apache.org] Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 01:47 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Convenience Binary Policy On 22.10.2014 03:02, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> Binary dependencies are, by definition, not rel

RE: Convenience Binary Policy

below, -Original Message- From: shaposh...@gmail.com [mailto:shaposh...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Roman Shaposhnik Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 21:37 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Convenience Binary Policy On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On

RE: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

at could be made to ensure its availability whenever needed? I have only question in this area. I believe there is a definite concern, but I am not sure where it has teeth beyond a ritual requirement. - Dennis -----Original Message- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] Sent: Mo

RE: key signing - issues

Following up on Benson's statement, I want to confirm my understanding of how the "LDAP key" connection works: 1. I generate an OpenPGP key pair for myself. I use orcmid@ a.o as an e-mail address associated with the PGP cert. I put the public key in an appropriate public place where it can be

RE: key signing

I don't understand what "keys from LDAP" are? Are these the same as keys whose fingerprints a ASF committer registers in their account or something else? - Dennis -Original Message- From: Benson Margulies [mailto:bimargul...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 08:54 To: general@

RE: key signing

+1 An Apache CA would also be handy for setting up code signing (the kind carried in the code package and recognized by operating systems, not an external signature of the kind being discussed here). To clarify one aspect of the Apache Trust Chain. It is not about email. It is about the publi

RE: key signing

From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 09:28 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: key signing [ ... ] I think the fundamental problems are that (1) this trust structure is not widely understood, even among (new) committers, and (2) the proce

RE: key signing

There is value of the external signature for attesting something about the creation of the artifact. The digest simply demonstrates that the artifact is intact. I've already agreed that the signing of other people's certificate is not that valuable in the case of Apache releases. Because of t

RE: key signing

+1 I'm assuming Benson means the digest (SHA1) by "signature." Using those from the Apache site is probably the first-line for power users and about as much extra effort that can be expected. The use of download utilities that reliably check signatures from authentic sources is a small boost

RE: key signing

regard to checking digital signatures on release candidates and in any subsequent forensic investigation/confirmation. - Dennis -Original Message----- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 08:19 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: k

RE: key signing

@Nick I don't understand the supposed attack vector concerning the file digests being of no value and the WoT being essential. - Dennis ANALYSIS So long as the digest value is obtained from a reliable read-only source, it doesn't matter where the file comes from, the digest can be verified.

RE: key signing

@Marvin, Can you say more about Multi-factor? I know commonly-claimed schemes involve the same factor multiple times (e.g., more things that a party knows, like Aunt Gracie's dress size). I agree that confirming a picture ID (something the individual has) is another factor. What other factor

RE: key signing

@Benson There are two things that can be done, with (2) being what matters to you, it seems to me: 1. The committer can upload the fingerprint-associated public key to the PGP Global Directory at . That will initiate an e-mail verification for every e-mail

RE: key signing

onday, October 15, 2012 11:22 To: Dennis E. Hamilton Cc: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: key signing Dennis E. Hamilton wrote on Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:07:56 -0700: > <https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/orcmid.asc>. (I'm not sure > where this is fetched from, so I&

RE: [PROPOSAL] Apache Linda

I've been biting my tongue all of this time and I can't resist any longer. The missing case is "Lovelace" (bad joke), although WebLace is about linking too. There's no need to borrow a human nick. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Nandana Mihindukulasooriya [mailto:nandana@gmail.

RE: LICENSE/NOTICE revisited (was Release Apache Marmotta 3.0.0-incubating (RC8))

Not so fast about dispensing with Category B requirements for pointers to source code. In MPL 2.0, a common case, it is very clear that location of the source code is one of the requirements for distribution of the code in executable form or within a larger work (distributed in binary), that th

RE: LICENSE/NOTICE revisited (was Release Apache Marmotta 3.0.0-incubating (RC8))

bating (RC8)) On 23 April 2013 18:05, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton > wrote: > > Not so fast about dispensing with Category B requirements for pointers to > > source code. > > Thank you for the specific information about the MP

RE: [CANCEL] [VOTE] Release Apache Curator 2.0.0-incubating (updated)

Four suggestions: 1. Add a UID having your Apache ID, randgalt@ apache.org, in that PGP public-key certificate. You can indicate that it is your preference for code signing, if you desire. 2. Log into your randgalt@ a.o profile at and provide the fingerprint of your

RE: [CANCEL] [VOTE] Release Apache Curator 2.0.0-incubating (updated)

Regarding (4), Once you've created the signature file, simply prepend text to it in front of the -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- line. You can have something like Signature by Release Manager Jordan Zimmerman Public Key Certificate:

RE: [META DISCUSS] talking about the overall state of this PMC

It's often called a dead-man's switch. I think the term applied originally to locomotive engineers and also metro car drivers. (I'm not sure what a dead pilot switch could accomplish in an aircraft.) I think having mentors review and "sign" PPMC status reports is an effective dead mentor's sw

RE: Correct process for signing keys?

@Christian The other advantage of the people list is that it is automatically updated from the federation of PGP key servers so it reflects the latest "web of trust" and also, I presume, any revocation. In some cases, PMC wide is a bit too generous though. I think the release manager's Apac

RE: [PROPOSAL] OData Proposal for Incubator

I think one concern here is appropriation of a generic, specified-tied name to an implementation, even a reference implementation. "Apache OData" seems over-reaching in that respect, especially since there are other projects, at ASF and elsewhere, that may employ OData bindings and services of

RE: [PROPOSAL] OData Proposal for Incubator

citly. We would like to keep it simple and avoid confusion. We had also a look into the ASF project naming guidelines and I think most of the points there are considered by the name Apache OData. Regards, Stephan On 18.06.13 03:28, "Dennis E. Hamilton" wrote: >I think one concern h

RE: [PROPOSAL] OData Proposal for Incubator

p://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olingo On 18.06.13 15:58, "Dennis E. Hamilton" wrote: >I think there will be an issue with regard to trademarks and you will >have to deal with folks seeing the trademark of "Apache OData" as a >land-grab at "OData" itself. The simplici

RE: [IP CLEARANCE] BigCouch

That page talks about transfer of copyright and addition of Apache copyright notices on the code as imported. Huh? Why aren't the guidelines for transfer of cleaned-up contributions under SGAs being followed, and an SGA being filed that details the contribution? - Dennis -Original Messag

RE: [IP CLEARANCE] BigCouch

tes as he stepped through the process. Which specific guidelines do you not believe have been followed? Why do you believe that an SGA has not been filed? On 26 June 2013 16:05, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > That page talks about transfer of copyright and addition of Apache > copyright notice

RE: [IP CLEARANCE] BigCouch

ointing out problems with *this* ip clearance thread in particular or are you commenting on the template itself? Had you seen the template before today? B. On 26 June 2013 17:27, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > Under the heading "Copyright" there is an item with text "Check and

[OT] The promise of Olingo

nt. -----Original Message- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 08:42 AM To: 'Klevenz, Stephan'; general@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] OData Proposal for Incubator Stephen, I support your choice to have a different na

RE: [VOTE] Accept Olingo proposal as an incubating project

+1 (non-binding) On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Florian Müller wrote: > Hi all, > > I'd like to call a VOTE for acceptance of Olingo into the Apache incubator. > > The proposal is pasted at the bottom on this email. > The corresponding wiki page is: http://wiki.apache.org/** > incubator/Olingo

RE: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal - Dependency License Clash

I've lost the thread on this, but I thought that one observation was about the dependencies in OpenOffice.org (and LibreOffice.org) on material from other sources and not necessarily under the same license. In that regard, there may be a difference among some of those in terms of what is consi

RE: OO.o downloads on Day One (was: "opportunity to reunite the related communities" ...)

I don't know how you can QA and regression test any OpenOffice.org distro if you don't build it, and built it for multiple platforms. And you need the distro to be "as-built" (uh, not exactly how that term is used these days, but think of the reason uucp was invented) or it is all over but shoo

RE: Apache OpenOffice.org Incubator Proposal: Collaboration with TDF/LO

I've edited it a tiny bit and may do more. If we get into a Wikipedia edit-reversion war, I am sure that there are wiser heads who will intervene. (It is unfortunate that this wiki doesn't come with "Discuss" pages, but that doesn't mean we can't introduce one or more as our own convention.)

RE: Discussion with TDF/LO people (was: Apache OpenOffice.org Incubator Proposal: Collaboration with TDF/LO)

Here are the global lists: < http://www.documentfoundation.org/contribution/#lists> I suggest the steering-disc...@documentationfoundation.org or, if you find that too forward (or if posting is restricted), just disc...@documentfoundation.org for starters. - Dennis -Original Message

RE: Apache OpenOffice.org Incubator Proposal: Collaboration with TDF/LO

Something about the licenses to be reconciled is useful to have somewhere so folks can understand what the big deal is. Maybe in a location for backup details? For example, contributors to the current LibreOffice code are asked to assert LGPL3/MPL. The extensive effort and roadmap for user do

RE: OpenOffice.org Apache Licensing Q's [was: Incubator Proposal]

The extensive LibreOffice user-documentation project is producing GPL3[+]/CC-by3.0 dual-licensed documents. I assume that CC-by is not toxic for Apache, since it is the closest CC license to permissive (i.e., it is at least as permissive as modified BSD) and it allows derivative works, of cours

RE: "opportunity to reunite the related communities" Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting the Community?

I've been wondering if there is a division of labor that works for the short term while community-spanning work continues: 1. I'm thinking that it is important to recognize that LibreOffice has some remarkable momentum. There is a great deal they are on top of or are getting on top of, includ

RE: OpenOffice and the ASF

Quoting the full context for "these" at : "The second is projects that implement free standards that are competing against proprietary standards, such as Ogg Vorbis (which competes against MP3 audio) and WebM (which competes against MPEG

RE: OO/LO License

PS: As far as I can tell, what none of those distributions do in their appeals to LGPL3 is carry any indication of where and how their source code can be found. Naughty, naughty. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] Sent: Saturday

RE: OO/LO License + Why LO needs the AFL 2.0 to exist (quickly)

I have trouble imagining MPL'd binaries being baked into an Apache offering. 1. For now, it doesn't matter. At the moment, there are no separable MPL'd bits into something like reusable libraries at all. There is simply no re-licensing of LibreOffice (especially the still-significant LGPL par

RE: OO/LO License

2011 15:50 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: OO/LO License On 6/4/2011 11:58 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: <http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3c009001cc22e9$73f6cbe0$5be463a0$@acm.org%3e> > Just to un-muddy the waters a little, it shou

RE: OO/LO License + Why LO needs the AFL 2.0 to exist (quickly)

the AFL 2.0 to exist (quickly) On Jun 4, 2011 6:25 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton" wrote: >... > 2. With regard to building distributions, binary libraries are terribly > awkward unless Apache were to limit its OpenOffice project to a single > platform and programming model. In c

RE: OpenOffice - Wiki - Required Resources - Subversion vs. Mercurial vs. Git

I say that the sooner one can move to uni-directional flows with the bi-directionals out in customization and adoption layers, if anywhere, the better. It is difficult to conceive of any other way to get on top of the refactoring that is surely required as part of making a manageable, layered

RE: List of files covered by the OpenOffice grant

Although it is still a daunting list (over 100 items), it is interesting to grep the list for ".mk" files. This will show some places where some third-party components seem to be introduced (e.g., zlib.mk). I'm not sure where the build process is handled and what the tooling requirement is. I

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

As a type O-positive human, I think the metaphor works quite well. I can donate blood that is compatible with folks that I can't receive blood from. In fact, I can only receive blood of another O-type individual (positive or negative). Yet my blood is compatible with that of all *-positive i

RE: OpenOffice: where are we now?

+1 -Original Message- From: robert_w...@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_w...@us.ibm.com] Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 15:34 To: general@incubator.apa

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice - That's Not What Re-Licensing Is

If you remove the ALv2 license and don't provide the notice that the license requires, you are in violation and are infringing the Apache copyright. Likewise, adding a copyright notice to an intact public domain work is not a claim that is defensible. There's a misunderstanding about relicens

RE: OpenOffice & LibreOffice

In support of Sam's point here, I add that OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice.org already provide the required ALv2 notices in their listings of third-party dependencies. The list is installed as part of every install of one of the distributions. I even included a copy of one of the latest LibreOf

RE: Legal concern: Are we getting to close ot a "division of markets" conversation?

The problem here is that Rob and Sam and other well-known employees are being addressed as IBM employees here and even called to account for their employer's behavior and intentions by some of the participants. I suggest that the best way to deal with those requests is to meet them with silence

RE: Questions for the cheap seats. - Priming the Pump

I think this should be the very first step regardless, even for first materials accessible from the podling. The next would be to figure out how to stage it onto the Apache infrastructure, build what can be built, see what the deltas are, etc. This sort of preservation and assessment seems indi

RE: Questions for the cheap seats. - Priming the Pump

would not recommend this as a "first step" since it would be abnormal. Tarballs on the sly aren't good; the ASF wants a proper, vetted release. Cheers, -g On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 00:00, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > I think this should be the very first step regardless, even fo

RE: Legal concern: Are we getting to close ot a "division of markets" conversation?

ject: Re: Legal concern: Are we getting to close ot a "division of markets" conversation? On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > The problem here is that Rob and Sam and other well-known employees > are being addressed as IBM employees here I perceive

RE: Questions for the cheap seats. - Priming the Pump

orward with making the podling accepted and successful. Then making a proper release that consumers can rely on, with the full backing of the ASF. Cheers, -g On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 00:40, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > Since I don't know what "proper, vetted release" entails

RE: OpenOffice.org Summit Proposal - Budget Concerns

Some of us in the region can probably find our way to Portland, Oregon, but OSCON doesn't fit an open-source budget [;<). Could there be a venue where it is not necessary to register for OSCON to be able to participate? - Dennis -Original Message- From: Simon Phipps [mailto:si...@webm

RE: A little OOo history - and lining up our arrows

I am personally quite fond of this kernel.org-style idea. It is consistent with focused attention on ensuring a rock-solid reference implementation for ODF-native office-productivity software (and reusable components) while allowing its confident use in building user-facing distributions to a

Introducing orcmid

Hi, My name is Dennis Hamilton. I am a semi-retired software system architect living in Seattle, Washington. My profile of profiles is already up at . The "orcmid" handle goes back to DecWars on a PDP-10 and the early CompuServe CB chat rooms. My con

RE: Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

I am pleased that we have been asked to introduce ourselves. I am excited by what I have been reading this morning. I consider myself to be handicapped as an American native-language English speaker. It is very easy to say something in a very complex way and not notice. With so many participa

RE: Request: Can "proposed committers" introduce themselves?

Hi Christian. What a great positive attitude. I'm excited to see you here. And moin moin to you too (it is 06:56 here in Seattle). I did not know the relationship with "moien" auf Deutsch. Now I know why Svante Schubert says it. Ciao, - Dennis -Original Message- From: Christian

RE: Vote plans for OOo proposal

Subscribing to changes of a specific page, such as seem to work just fine, however. Possible stop-gap for this particular activity? = Dennis -Original Message- From: David Crossley [mailto:cross...@apache.org] Sent: Thursday, June 0

[VOTE] Accept OpenOffice.org for incubation

[X] +1 Accept OpenOffice.org for incubation (non-binding) Comment: While I favor focusing on the reference implementation for ODF, as my previous comments reflect, I believe that and related scope decisions about releases and deployment are a matter for the podling to work through. -

RE: [DISCUSSION] Accept OpenOffice.org for incubation

I don't understand the assertions here. It may not matter in the larger scheme of things, but I didn't want some of the assumptions here to go unquestioned. 1. It is certainly the case that the proposal comprehends sustaining OpenOffice.org and continuing it as an Apache project. The proposal

RE: ODF Toolkit Incubation Pre-Proposal

I support this idea. I think with regard to need for an SGA or not, there is the matter of the current headings at the tops of source files. (I have no idea what is required, I'm simply observing what is there.) - Dennis "/***

RE: [PROPOSAL] ODF Toolkit for Incubation

1. In the proposal, "The coders on the existing ODF Toolkit will comprise the initial committers on the Apache project. These committers have varying degrees of experience with Apache-style open source development, ranging from none to being committers on other Apache projects." That strikes

RE: nbsp in unicode podling pages

Looking at the source of the text/html at it appears that this is relevant: in the element. Unfortunately, the pages are served up as UTF8. If I change the encoding in which the page is viewed to 8859-1, the problem goes away. It could be because all o

RE: A Spam ? (was: Re: You have been recruited to the Love/Avon Army of Women)

It's a version of the Nigerian scam, but claimed to be from Ivory Coast. -Original Message- From: Mohammad Nour El-Din [mailto:nour.moham...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 05:03 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: A Spam ? (was: Re: You have been recruited to the Love/A

RE: Confusion: Sponsoring entity and Champions

For example, the Apache OpenOffice.org Podling has no chair. The creation of the monthly report has been undertaken as a community effort, although it seems to be a variant of launch-pad chicken (falling on whoever thinks the deadline is too close and it is time to put something up there for ot

Establishing New Committers

Here's a Form letter that I have been evolving. It has been used in recent invitations from the Apache OpenOffice.org Podling where an iCLA is already on file. You are welcome to try this. There are additional places to be customized for use by a different podling. I have added brackets where

RE: Establishing New Committers

Here's a modification of the letter that I have been evolving. It has been used in recent invitations from the Apache OpenOffice.org Podling where no iCLA is on file. You are welcome to try this. There are additional places to be customized for use by a different podling. I have added bracket

RE: incubator is a single group

Small items: 1. There are no podling PPMC members that have the necessary authorizations, even though they are committers. Mentors (and a champion) yes, chair no. This is partly why there are these regular calls for a mentor or someone on the incubator PMC to connect some dots. 2. The auth

RE: incubator is a single group

It is the case that Initial Committers are eligible to serve on the PPMC, though not all choose to do so. Also, it is apparently a recommendation that invited committers be invited to the PPMC, but it doesn't seem to be a requirement. Again, not all that are so invited choose to serve on the

RE: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?)

As member of a PPMC whose champion continued after formation of the podling, I would miss someone in that role. Also, the notion of the champion as the podling mentor herder has a certain appeal. At the moment, our champion is the person who performs many of the actions that require more th

RE: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?)

incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?) On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 02:09:13PM -0800, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > Also, the notion of the champion a

RE: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?)

e informal chairs?) On 24 November 2011 03:29, Sam Ruby wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton > wrote: >> I'm sorry. I did not mean to suggest that the champion of the PPMC of which >> I am a member is any of those cases. I'm certain our cha

RE: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?)

I had hoped that the business of a PPMC-member champion being a VP-elect would have just gone away. That coupling is certain to inspire political motivation and purpose. I think that's a terrible trick to play on a PPMC. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [mai

RE: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?)

rg Cc: dennis.hamil...@acm.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?) On Nov 24, 2011, at 9:25 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > On 24 November 2011 17:17, Dennis E. Hamilton > wrote: >> I had hoped

RE: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?)

Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?) Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Nov 24, 2011 5:59 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton" wrote: > > I understand about PMC chairs, but I thought that is for a TLP

RE: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)

I notice that the NOTICE has this incomplete statement: This product includes the scala runtime and compiler (www.scala-lang.org) developed by EPFL, which includes the following license: There is not any following license. I also notice that the LICENSE file has copyright notices. - D

RE: [PROPOSAL] Apache Bloodhound

Uh, here's the TRAC License: . You have to do what it says. The language is very simple. So is the Copyright notice. If this is the codebase that you propose to be the foundation of Bloodhound development, I suspect that an SGA (Software Grant Agreem

RE: [PROPOSAL] Apache Bloodhound

eneral@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org Cc: Mark Struberg; Ian Wild; Greg Stein; hwri...@apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Bloodhound On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > Uh, here's the TRAC License: <http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/TracLicense>. > &

RE: Binary dependencies in source releases (Was: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0)

I think a bigger issue specifically for Apache OpenOffice has to do with branding and status of the "released" binaries. It is where the Apache (plus "incubating") origin is brought to the users attention and what will be understood for it. It is served up directly (from the user perspective

RE: CloudStack Incubation proposal

Minor nit: In economic terms, Apache OpenOffice and LibreOffice are not complementary. - Dennis In computing, an example of complements are hardware and software. Software vendors want the hardware to be free (more for us!) and hardware vendors want the software to be free (more for us!).

RE: Extraordinary OpenOffice security patch (Was: [Incubator Wiki] Update of "April2012" by robweir)

I don't think the problem is with the size of the ooo-security list membership. I think it is in the assumption that the [P]PMC has somehow delegated the ability to make a release of any kind to the ooo-security team. I don't mean slip-streaming fixes and working off the public SVN until that

RE: Extraordinary OpenOffice security patch (Was: [Incubator Wiki] Update of "April2012" by robweir)

.org Subject: Re: Extraordinary OpenOffice security patch (Was: [Incubator Wiki] Update of "April2012" by robweir) On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > I don't think the problem is with the size of the ooo-security list > membership. I think

RE: Extraordinary OpenOffice security patch (Was: [Incubator Wiki] Update of "April2012" by robweir)

Oh, and I communicated to another podling (via their podling-private@ ) whose PPMC I am not on that they might want to pay attention to this vulnerability as well, and that was apparently valuable input. -Original Message- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] Sent

RE: Extraordinary OpenOffice security patch (Was: [Incubator Wiki] Update of "April2012" by robweir)

- From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com] Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2012 12:41 To: general@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org Subject: Re: Extraordinary OpenOffice security patch (Was: [Incubator Wiki] Update of "April2012" by robweir) On 12 April 2012 17:32

RE: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1

@Norbert, I don't see any mention of patent issues in that message. Since Symphony-related contributions have not occurred yet, they certainly are irrelevant to the release of Apache OpenOffice (incubating) 3.4.0. It is a good thing that IBM will ensure there is no encumbrance in anything tha

RE: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1

3.4 (incubating) RC1 On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 12:17 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > @Norbert, > > I don't see any mention of patent issues in that message. it says: "But one thing not to lose track of is that Symphony has done IP remediation at many levels. Where we've wor

RE: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1

Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 23:21 To: general@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4 (incubating) RC1 On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 12:57 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > I have no reason to believe that the remediation Rob speaks of has any

RE: [MENTORS] Third Party source

Along with the policy and trustworthiness matters that Sam provides, I can speculate some other reasons for concern about removing/replacing notices (of any kind) -- * Removal of a copyright notice can be taken as evidence of intentional infringement if not negligent infringement. * Removal

RE: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

If you identified the public places and were more specific about it, it would help us to clean it up as appropriate. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Nick Kew [mailto:n...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 22:03 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: References to "Apache Ope

RE: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

uot; On 23 Jun 2012, at 06:47, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > If you identified the public places and were more specific about it, it would > help us to clean it up as appropriate. In fact the word pair "Apache OpenOffice" appears no fewer than three times on the front page www.apa

RE: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

over on ooo-dev. - Dennis PS: I'm now in time-penalty and will check back anon. -Original Message- From: Nick Kew [mailto:n...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 11:38 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice" On 23 Jun 2012

RE: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

I do not dispute the existence of other reliable creators of binary distributions. The *nix packagings and installation in consumer desktops are notable for the value that they provide. I think that experience teaches us that there absolutely needs to be a way to obtain and install *authenti

RE: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

+1 on how to start, with the maturity model as exemplar, is an outstanding idea. Thanks. (I even have a poddling in mind for stress-testing it.) - Dennis -Original Message- From: Bertrand Delacretaz [mailto:bdelacre...@apache.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 05:57 To: Incubator Ge

RE: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

gnite from the Apache Incubator) On 4 August 2015 at 18:46, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > +1 on how to start, with the maturity model as exemplar, is an outstanding > idea. Thanks. > > (I even have a poddling in mind for stress-testing it.) > It is clear to me, that incubator offer m

RE: Podlings and the ASF maturity model (was: Reform of Incubator...)

ator General ; dennis.hamil...@acm.org Subject: Podlings and the ASF maturity model (was: Reform of Incubator...) Hi, On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 12:24 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > ...I understand the maturity model to be something to aspire to and that > Apache Projects > will always be worki

RE: third party tooling.

I don't have an answer about tooling with respect to the need for widely-available tools. If the concern is for ability to use free tools on Windows, but there are alternatives to requiring an expensive commercial IDE for users while still taking advantage of the Microsoft development tool chai

RE: Podlings and the ASF maturity model (was: Reform of Incubator...)

+1 with the understanding that there is the usual flexibility between policies and practices, consistent with the spirit and principles of the ASF for Apache Projects. And, to be fair, I think TLPs should also self-assess on a periodic basis as an accountability of the PMC, nudged as necess

RE: third party tooling.

I want to come back to the question about the dependency of a source release on third-party tooling to be built. There is some sort of principle involved when it comes to how others can build the source easily, even if only to confirm that it builds and operates. I would not want to see an Ap

  1   2   >