I’d like to see Apache find a way to sponsor the template gallery. The current
site collects data and inclusion is controlled by Salesforce I believe. I guess
there is nothing wrong with that but it would be great to have a free open
collection of templates as the Apache blessed method of contri
It’s great to see such interest and I’m sure the rest of the podling would
agree that the more the better. I also agree with Suneel, people who know PIO
should be given a short bit of time to get organized before we do the desired
expansion. There will be lots of room to contribute, in any case.
+1 for the current committer list, but please, anyone interested get familiar,
we will need more help soon!
Also I’d like to bring up the template gallery again. Plugins may be
problematic in other projects but pio does nothing of interest *without* a
template. There are some examples in the co
e with the proposers that tracking down a large set of contributors
to get their ok for a consolidated grant would be onerous.
On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Pat Ferrel wrote:
> +1 for the current committer list, but please, anyone interested get
> familiar, we will need more help soon!
&g
I’ll second the ping and since I’m much less polite than Donald I’d like to add
that there are PRs and branches to be merged from a number of people that want
to contribute. A release would be a shot in the arm to our growing community.
Lots of good work is waiting on the vote.
+1 [non-binding]
What Donald said but also we use a slightly different process than most Apache
projects. Master is not a snapshot, we keep snapshots in the “develop” branch
until RCs start and they are the only contents of master ever—that is RCs or
releases. This process is not typical in Apache but I don’t th
To clarify the only thing you will ever find in master is a set of commits
tagged as an RC or release, never the intermediate changes as in typical
master/snapshots.
On Oct 7, 2016, at 8:59 AM, Pat Ferrel wrote:
What Donald said but also we use a slightly different process than most Apache
+1 non-binding
Next release we could exclude the doc site. Do build files like .sbt require
licenses? I suppose it can be done in comments. But again can we push to next
release?
Can other binding voters have a look? I know everyone is busy but hey, tax day
is past ;-)
On Apr 18, 2017, at 1
all cases) so a veto
role by the IPMC seems to have minimum danger to the ASF system of checks and
balances.
On Apr 19, 2017, at 9:33 AM, Pat Ferrel wrote:
+1 non-binding
Next release we could exclude the doc site. Do build files like .sbt require
licenses? I suppose it can be done in
release
candidates per year. There are so many members of the IPMC that this would
easily cover all of the votes that come up.
Julian
> On Apr 22, 2017, at 8:46 AM, Pat Ferrel wrote:
>
> Probably the wrong place for this but…
>
> What do people think about a governance chang
release is the solution.
>>
>> I wish that each IPMC member would personally commit to voting on two
>> release candidates per year. There are so many members of the IPMC that
>> this would easily cover all of the votes that come up.
>>
>> Julian
>>
&g
There have been no binding votes, thanks.
On Apr 22, 2017, at 11:31 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
How many binding votes do you need at this point?
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:34 PM Pat Ferrel wrote:
> +1 non-binding
>
> Next release we could exclude the doc site. Do build files
But is it worth doing yet another podling RC and release vote?
If it is, please vote -1, at least we won’t be left waiting and we thank you
for being the one who took a look either way.
We are just trying to move, out if possible or iterate if not. These issues
have not changed from the curren
g for anything to be fixed.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:43 PM Andrew Purtell
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I will too, and then you will have two binding votes in the affirmative.
>>>
>>>> On Apr 22, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Luciano
Actually we did go over the maturity checklist ourselves. Donald, maybe you can
forwards the thread here.
On Sep 29, 2017, at 2:04 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
Hi John,
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:59 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> ...I wouldn't conflate lack of mentor engagement with a project'
oh, nm I found it. Pasted below, there were no dissenters to Donald’s detailed
assessment.
On Sep 29, 2017, at 3:27 PM, Pat Ferrel wrote:
Actually we did go over the maturity checklist ourselves. Donald, maybe you can
forwards the thread here.
pasted from the thread on
d
16 matches
Mail list logo
