t;
> On 2018/01/27 18:59:09, Zachary Yaro wrote:
> > I do not recall getting an answer to this before: do we still have access
> > to the old (pre-Apache) mailing list?
> >
> > Zachary Yaro
> >
> > On Jan 27, 2018 10:53, "Upayavira" wrote:
> >
lists.
John,
Would it be possible to schedule the list shutdown at a fixed point in the
future? e.g. 1week?
Then those that remain here have that time to arrange a new venue for
communication. If no such discussion happens - so be it, but at least there was
a window for that discussion.
Upayavira
really aimed at members of the Wave PPMC, however general votes
are welcomed.
[ ] +1 Retire Wave
[ ] 0 Abstain
[ ] -1 Keep Wave in the Apache Incubator
Upayavira
just requires a consensus, here.
Upayavira
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, at 05:06 PM, Upayavira wrote:
> I would say that the vote should happen as soon as it can. The ASF won't
> put us under undue pressure to move things elsewhere (so long as they
> actually happen!)
>
> Upayavira
>
I would say that the vote should happen as soon as it can. The ASF won't
put us under undue pressure to move things elsewhere (so long as they
actually happen!)
Upayavira
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017, at 04:01 PM, Yuri Z wrote:
> Ok, let's wait some time. But, repo, jira and documentat
> >
> > On 27 November 2017 at 14:43, Dustin Pfannenstiel <
> > dustin.pfannenst...@nth-estate.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I've set up a repo and organization for the code base on github.
> > > https://github.com/TimaeusWave/WaveServer
> > >
>
11:43 AM, Dustin Pfannenstiel <
> dustin.pfannenst...@nth-estate.com> wrote:
>
> > I've set up a repo and organization for the code base on github.
> > https://github.com/TimaeusWave/WaveServer
> >
> > Thanks for the years of support and, well, just everything
process from Apache's side.
The code is publicly available under an Apache License. Any of you can
push your local repo up to GitHub and share it with whoever you like,
using a name that includes the word "Wave", so that would be a step
alongside the more ASF-focussed administrative tasks above.
Upayavira
welcome it back.
Having checked, I do not believe the ASF would lay any claim on the name
"Wave" so the project could continue to call itself "Wave" at GitHub or
elsewhere.
Any thoughts/objections/alternative suggestions, before I call a
retirement vote?
Many thanks,
Upayavira
ix the bugs
> in that release. Because I believe we still wanted to do a release
> soonish.
>
> On 1 Jul 2017 10:12 PM, "Upayavira" wrote:
>
> > Presumably the time to do that would be when making a 0.5.0 release, no?
> > :-)
> >
> > On
Presumably the time to do that would be when making a 0.5.0 release, no?
:-)
On Sat, 1 Jul 2017, at 07:41 AM, Evan Hughes wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> wanting to gauge community feedback and feedback from the committers on
> the
> proposal of us bumping to version 0.5. I suggest we do this as I've bee
reness of how open
source communities function.
I hope this is helpful.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Upayavira
On Thu, 18 May 2017, at 02:13 PM, David Llop wrote:
> Hello, my name is David Llop and as Pablo has said, I am going to work on
> Wave/SwellRT during this Summer!
>
Pablo,
Do you see Wave's copy of SwellRT as a fork? Or perhaps as a downstream
dependency of SwellRT? How do you see the SwellRT team collaborating
with Wave?
Upayavira
On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, at 03:25 PM, Pablo Ojanguren wrote:
> ICLAs from original copyright owners of SwellRT source
ve of graduation, irrelevant.
Upayavira
I am not sure we can yet meet this cri
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017, at 03:57 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I know there has been some email traffic on this recently, but I think we
> should also prepare a little section in the wiki tha
> should start preparing now for the next report.
> > > >
> > > > On 27 Feb 2017 10:46 PM, "David Murphy" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Graduating may give the project greater visibility. What are the
> > > > > consequences for
ay "we are wondering whether we have reached
a sufficient level of stability to consider graduation, and are
discussing it" in our board report.
Upayavira
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017, at 01:15 PM, Evan Hughes wrote:
> If we do decide to go for grad it won't happen this round I reckon but
s the base requirement for
a functioning PMC.
We're not going to suddenly grow in a hurry. But it seems we're also not
going to go away either. Perhaps we should just bite the bullet and
discuss graduation?
Perhaps this question could be put into the board report somehow?
Upayavira
On
Welcome Pablo!
On Thu, 12 Jan 2017, at 11:35 AM, Yuri Z wrote:
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Wave has invited Pablo
> Ojanguren to become a committer and we are pleased to announce that he
> has
> accepted.
> Pablo is an active contributor of high quality code and is active w
I've not used lets-encrypt for Wave, but I've used it to automate the
creation of a Docker Registry server.
See here:
https://github.com/odoko-devops/uberstack/tree/master/apps/registry
Upayavira
On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, at 03:13 AM, Evan Hughes wrote:
> Gonna see if I can setup a de
s that could be made:
* We have started exploring the SwellRT code and how we might absorb it
* We are seeing some renewal of activity
* SwellRT has reduced the complexity of the Wave codebase, so pulling
it back into Wave will make it easier for new developers to engage with
us.
Upayavira
Absolutely, anyone here is welcome to join in with your efforts - more
power to you all!
On Tue, 29 Nov 2016, at 06:01 PM, Pablo Ojanguren wrote:
> of course @upayavira I know Apache positioning. I didn't mean to involve
> Apache directly, just to offer some help to Wave's com
Wave. As far as Apache is concerned, you
will just be another person paid to work on an Apache codebase - Apache
cannot give any special affirmation of your effort above those of any
other contributor.
Does that make sense?
Upayavira
On Tue, 29 Nov 2016, at 11:50 AM, Pablo Ojanguren wrote:
>
Now's a good time for folks to start looking at this code.
People who previously tried using Wave, but found it too complicated -
take a look at this branch - is it easier to work with? Are there places
you think you could usefully contribute?
Upayavira
On Wed, 16 Nov 2016, at 12:40 PM,
sonally I'll probably end up writing a GWT wrapper for the SwellRT
> client javascipt so I can use it myself ;)
>
> --
> http://lostagain.nl <-- our company site.
> http://fanficmaker.com <-- our, really,really, bad story generator.
>
>
> On 20 October 2016 at 18
that makes it worth the effort porting it to Apache.
The suggested steps you outline below are a great part of that.
Upayavira
On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, at 02:55 PM, Thomas Wrobel wrote:
> Any consensus then on how to move forward?
> I've signed up and started looking around swellrt. O
ll be a no-brainer for Apache to accept SwellRT.
Upayavira
On Mon, 10 Oct 2016, at 10:10 PM, Adam John wrote:
> Sorry to have missed you, Thomas.
>
> "Cant a date be set, a vote be taken, then either import SwellRT or not?"
> According to Upayavira there should be a propos
ing into Apache before we do it.
Upayavira
On Mon, 10 Oct 2016, at 10:00 PM, Thomas Wrobel wrote:
> I am sorry I didn't make the meeting, glade to see it was productive.
> However, I am curious though why there is questions still as to if
> SwellRT should be merged with wave.
>
contributing over there. Then, we'd be bringing both code and
community into Apache, which would give me far more confidence than just
importing code but with no confidence that anyone is actually going to
do anything with it.
Upayavira
On Wed, 5 Oct 2016, at 10:03 PM, Adam John wrote:
>
est course of action is for a few people to get
together and produce an entirely new Wave codebase. We've tried, and
failed with the codebase we have.
Upayavira
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016, at 08:25 AM, Adam John wrote:
> Created a GitHub organization, added each of the available repos:
> https
seems to be simply too complex for people to be
able to pick up. The idea stands as a good one, but the code is just too
complex.
Upayavira
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, at 09:58 PM, Taylor Fahlman wrote:
> I've been a reader of this list for a while. I am another one of the
> people
> who
omeone (or someones) wanted to move it to Github, that'd be
fine. I'm sure Apache wouldn't object to them using the name "Wave" in
some form.
Upayavira
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, at 08:54 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Yuri,
>
> Being a mostly silent participant at this point.
n maybe there
could be hope for the project at Apache. But there is very little
resource available here for reviewing your work, so we must also be
realistic.
Upayavira
On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, at 05:05 PM, Greg Cochard wrote:
> I am also a cheerleader of the project and given some more time I'
to the name "Apache
Wave", I cannot imagine anyone objecting to a "Wave" project being set
up, e.g. on Github. So long as the terms of the Apache License V2 are
honoured, it is quite acceptable for the project to continue elsewhere,
where there is no particular expectation of activity level.
Upayavira
The wiki page has been marked as 'final'. If you know how to update the
actual report, feel free.
Upayavira
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, at 02:13 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Got it. If you're having issues with the wiki, I'd be happy to tick your
> name for you (since
Regarding Wave, I'm happy to sign off the report, just didn't get time
and got stuck regaining access to my wiki account given slow responses
from Moin. And yes, if Wave continues in the incubator, it really could
do with more mentors.
Upayavira
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, at 11:56 AM, Joh
t way in open source - the project has no power to make me do
anything at all, in which case, timescales are pretty useless.
Upayavira
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016, at 10:37 PM, Gaurav Shukla wrote:
> I second Upayavira on this, the project brief looks fine but it should be
> broken down into meaningf
pen source is to tap into developer's sense of
their own self-interest.
Thoughts?
Upayavira
guess you'll hope they love it enough
to take it on.
Upayavira
my mac. I ll try later on my windows laptop.
>
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 8:58 PM Yuri Z wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I have vagrant and virtual box - but still got some issues. I am
> > working to fix them. Meanwhile - can someone review this patch?
> >
> > On Thu, D
Install both VirtualBox and Vagrant on your mac, then do vagrant up
The ubuntu/fedora etc refers (i presume) the guest OS rather than the
host os which is in your case MacOS.
Upayavira
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015, at 03:37 PM, Yuri Zelikov wrote:
>
>
> > On Dec. 24, 2015, 3:18 p.m.,
a
community could be seen as three active developers. And also to show
that the community has learned how to collaborate in accordance with
what is loosely described as "the Apache Way".
Upayavira
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015, at 02:25 PM, Andreas Kotes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, De
Someone needs to just agitate on general@incubator to find a volunteer
or two to review our release.
Once it has received three +1 votes from Incubator PMC members, it will
be an official incubator release and we are done with that task.
Upayavira
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015, at 02:23 PM, Yuri Z wrote
Not quite the same. The project has put the release to the Incubator
PMC. If they do not respond, it isn't the Wave community's fault. So, in
the board report, you can state that you are waiting on the Incubator
PMC to complete your I first release vote.
Upayavira
On Sun, Nov 29, 2015
Bug and nudge on general@incubator.
Upayavira
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015, at 04:40 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Is there anything we can do to help with that?
>
>
>
>
> On 11/14/15, 6:07 AM, "Ali Lown" a...@lown.me.uk> wrote:
>
> >I am trying to get en
Lown wrote:
> Upayavira,
>
> Am I overlooking something?
>
> I definitely wrote 6 committer votes (+1 mentor vote) in the email
> dated 3rd November.
>
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-wave-dev/201511.mbox/%3CCABRGrVenajwQPBw98Zy99UqrMNNQ
Congrats Ali, and good luck with your future plans!
Can I ask you to check those tallies? I'm sure there are more
committer/PPMC member votes than two.
Upayavira
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015, at 03:22 PM, Ali Lown wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Thanks for taking part in verifying this release ca
As far as I'm concerned, you can still vote on the existing thread.
Please vote from a legal perspective rather than a technical one.
The timeframe is set to ensure people have the ability to vote - it
isn't a requirement that it completes within a specific timeframe.
thx.
Upayavi
Non-binding votes have a different value. If we had insufficient
committer/PPMC votes but loads of quality (I.e not drive by) non-binding
votes, it would suggest we have a different problem, and could look how
to addresss that.
Upayavira
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015, at 09:33 PM, Zachary Yaro wrote:
>
arn during incubation.
Upayavira
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015, at 03:58 AM, Ali Lown wrote:
> Upayavira,
>
> I do concede that after watching over Wave here for the last 3 years
> the project doesn't appear to have progress hugely far in terms of new
> user-visible functionality, but I don&#
hat can sometimes be challenging. But having shown that
this PPMC can (a) produce a release tarball and (b) submit it to the
Incubator PMC having acquired 3 or more +1 votes from PPMC members would
make a big difference in terms of moving us closer to meeting graduation
requirements.
Reasonable?
Upay
that all of the source code is Apache Licensed, meaning it can be
forked elsewhere - the only discussion required is the name that the
relocated project would take.
Thoughts?
Upayavira
Yes, please do!
On Sat, May 30, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Yuri Z wrote:
> Ok, should we then proceed with release while adding a notice that
> federation is broken atm?
>
> On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 11:23 AM Upayavira wrote:
>
> > remember that the intent of this release is to sho
.
Let's get a legally correct release out now, and then aim to follow it
with another that has more bugs fixed.
Upayavira
On Fri, May 29, 2015, at 09:36 PM, Yuri Z wrote:
> Well, actually it looks like we have an issue with federation...
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 11:35 PM Up
What I'm waiting to hear is "here's a release that we've all voted on
and think is ready", which I will then review and (hopefully) pass onto
the incubator PMC for further review.
Upayavira
On Fri, May 29, 2015, at 07:59 AM, Ben Hegarty wrote:
> A massive +1, that
I have unsubscribed everyone on this list, and BCC’d them too, seeing as
they won’t see this message otherwise.
Upayavira
On Thu, May 7, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Basavaraj K N [MaGE] wrote:
> Please unsubscribe my this email ID
> "basavaraj...@manipalglobal.com<mailto:basavaraj...@man
reasonable certainty of completion and success. The main resource we
lack at the moment is people to actually do the work, so we need to
identify small, manageable tasks that will help draw in new resources
which might, in turn, allow us to take on larger tasks.
Upayavira
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015, at 04
I presume times are UTC?
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015, at 02:39 AM, Ali Lown wrote:
> Here is a fairly large Doodle poll to see see when may work as a good
> date/time for a hangout.
>
> http://doodle.com/uz9vq9qiwyuqigsa
>
> Let me know if you want more time options.
>
> Ali
>
> On 4 April 2015 at 07:
.
Upayavira
On Wed, Apr 1, 2015, at 06:39 PM, Upayavira wrote:
> for those here that aren't familiar with Apache style release votes,
> here is some background.
>
> When we vote on a release candidate, we are saying two things: that we
> believe it to be valid from a licensing pers
count. However, demonstrating that the community is behind the release
is also crucially important, so whoever you are, committer or not,
programmer or not, please download the artefact and review some of it.
Thanks!
Upayavira
the way in which the code is bad -
make it a simpler form of bad :-)
Getting a release out could help people make the recognition that they’d
like to help with this task. And I’d say it is worth a try.
Upayavira
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015, at 06:45 PM, Yuri Z wrote:
> So, should I prepare a new RC f
I would also happily join.
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015, at 10:24 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was once attending such a meeting and will do it again if it is
> helpful to this community.
>
> Mind to organize something via in example doodle?
>
> Cheers
> Christian
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 31,
upon.
Please join in the discussions and let us know where you can contribute.
But remember, we all contribute here as individuals first.
Thanks!
Upayavira
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015, at 02:48 PM, Kirill Kostyuchenko wrote:
> Hello Wiab!
> During the year Andrew Kaplanov & Denis Konovalchik i
See mention of it here:
https://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
Upayavira
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015, at 12:34 PM, Ben Hegarty wrote:
> Who do we send the scanned ICLA to?
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Christian Grobmeier
>
> wrote:
>
> > Awesome feedb
hopefully
incorporated.
The simple question that should drive the GSoC discussion: what changes
can we make to the WiaB codebase that will make it easier, more
accessible and more appealing to new developers/contributors?
Upayavira
On Sat, Mar 21, 2015, at 06:44 PM, Pablo Ojanguren wrote:
> Upayav
?
Upayavira
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015, at 04:50 PM, Roshan Lakmal wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I stared to read about Wave architecture and protocol.
>
> Can I still continue this project for GSoC 2015 or Is there any other
> task
> that I can contribute.
> Is there anyone to mentor me fo
Yuri,
Please know that there’d be no reason (as far as I am aware) that
current data would be removed from JIRA/Wiki/etc. It would simply be
marked read-only. I don’t know whether it’d be possible to add a
forwarding message to the top of such pages.
Upayavira
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015, at 05:41 PM
allows multiple implementations.
Upayavira
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015, at 10:24 AM, Yuri Z wrote:
> What are the technical requirements for graduation?
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:39 AM Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado
>
> wrote:
>
> > El 16/03/15 a las 08:35, Christian Grobmeier escr
/Sourceforge/etc.
In the end, this is a decision of the Incubator PMC, however I’d like to
see whether anyone here has any thoughts to add before I put this to the
wider Incubator community.
Upayavira
P.S. This came up on the incubator-general list as a part of a
discussion on the Wave report
We should aim to get a legally valid release out, and not worry so much
about bugs, this time. We can make a 0.4.1 release soon afterwards that
fixes those bugs. That release will be way simpler than the previous
one.
Upayavira
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014, at 11:33 AM, Yuri Z wrote:
> I found a
the terms of its license (note, some licenses mandate inclusion in
a binary form).
Upayavira
Maybe not, but it needs consensus, and if the vote gives us that, then
all well and good.
Upayavira
On Sat, Dec 14, 2013, at 06:31 AM, Yuri Z wrote:
> I think we just need to issue the request to Infra, no need to vote.
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Ali Lown wrote:
>
vote is to gauge where the community wants to be. The last
thing I want to do is mentor a group of folks that actually want to be
elsewhere. If the collective decision (principally of the
committers/PPMC members) is to stay, then I'm happy to stay around and
see where we can take this project.
to cast your votes:
[ ] Wave should stay at Apache
[ ] Wave should leave Apache, and find a home elsewhere
Thanks,
Upayavira
ues, so
it can be done (not that it should - ultimately tests not my decision to
make).
Upayavira
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013, at 08:42 PM, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> Will do. As I said, I don't anticipate starting the kickstarter for
> about a year, though I want to do preliminary work (prototyp
ork there to
your heart's content. The wider community need only kick in at the point
at which you want to release something.
I'm not saying you should do it in the ASF. As has been suggests here,
you'll need to assess a set of intangibles to make your decision - which
location would get you more traction? Which would better facilitate
exploration? Which would appeal most to potential funders?
And then, when you've made your decision, the rest of hue he wave
community needs ego make their own decision as to whether to stay or go.
All I'd like is that a decision is made, one way or the other.
Upayavira
, and will ease development,
then go for it, I say.
Upayavira
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013, at 01:46 AM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> I would still be more than happy to press through the mavenization, but
> it
> seemed like people were some what against the idea until we got the
> release out the door
er at Apache or elsewhere,
I'd encourage them to jump in and start suggesting where they think it
should go.
Upayavira
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013, at 11:37 AM, Thomas Wrobel wrote:
> Wave really lacks a roadmap?
> Surely that's something that could be hammered out, at least in rough, i
e to be
able to forward this vote to the incubator PMC saying we had 15 +1 votes
:-)
Upayavira
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013, at 06:13 PM, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) wrote:
> I was under the (maybe incorrect) impression that these releases are not
> focused on the code per se, but rather on getting th
e,
we would still have the bass for getting a release right, which will
make future releases vastly simpler.
Upayavira
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013, at 02:35 AM, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Christian Grobmeier
> wrote:
> > Am 12.09.13 20:35, schrieb Ali Lown:
> >
the quality, or otherwise, of the code-base.
And the next big thing is getting that release out - proving that we
understand how to correctly license(etc) our code. (We didn't actually
get to the point of releasing, did we??)
Upayavira
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013, at 12:47 PM, Alfredo Abambres
t* compatible with WIAB. Wouldn't reflect
very well on those servers though, I'd say, so could provide an
incentive to improve compatibility.
> (of course, in this specific case wiab.pro passes with ease as its
> contributing protocol improvements back)
Which is a good thing!
Upayavira
can
list it.
I'd say we can leave the 'contributing back' element to them. The
license doesn't require it, and if WIAB really takes off, they'll
struggle to maintain a compatible fork, so will learn by experience the
necessity for getting your fixes into the mainline codebase.
Upayavira
That sounds reasonable. The idea of a separation is nice, but I agree
that responsibility for the protocols does appear to ave fallen on us.
If this is the case, can we have the waveprotocol.org domain transferred
to the ASF? Then the infrastructure team can point it wherever we ask.
Upayavira
Christian didn't say exclusive, only that for PPMC members it is given
without question.
I'm very happy for you to help out.
Upayavira
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013, at 08:01 AM, Angus Turner wrote:
> I'm not a PMC but I could just see that as a way to further help out.
> Nev
What wiki? Do we have one? If not, I can get one set up. We have a
choice of MoinMoin or Confluence.
Upayavira
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013, at 04:12 PM, John Blossom wrote:
> Thank you! Glad to have your help.
>
> BTW, how does one add oneself to be an editor of the wiki? Anyone?
> Th
Switching to Maven would give us mvn eclipse:eclipse which would
generate these files for us. We could do the same with Ant, but that
would no doubt take some work.
Upayavira
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 09:52 AM, Yuri Z wrote:
> They are committed to SVN
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013
When the time comes, I'm prepared to have the necessary conversations to
see about a VM at Apache.
Upayavira
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013, at 11:38 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Yes the point would be to get federation up and running. An providing a
> place where we can deploy our new OT
Big +1 from me!
Upayavira
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013, at 05:19 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> Hello Wave'rs,
>
> as you might know, I am Apache Member and involved in various
> projects. I also have mentored a bunch of podlings, like for example
> OpenOffice, OGNL and Onami. Cu
Or use Ivy to download from the Maven repo.
Upayavira
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013, at 11:01 AM, Bruno Gonzalez (aka stenyak) wrote:
> Presumably we want wiab to be independent from third party download
> websites, so the "get-third-party-libs" script should point to our own
> mirro
to file for an ECCN given we use bouncy-castle. (Is this
> only an issue if we include it, if we have it fetched by a separate
> task (given the IPMC don't seem to like having the jars shipped with
> Wave) is it still a problem?)
The ECCN stuff is for 'exporting encryption'. If we release a
convenience binary, then as far as the US govt is concerned, we need to
do the ECCN stuff.
Upayavira
Are te Eclipse classpath and project files committed into SVN, or are
they generated by ant?
I'd expect there to be an 'ant eclipse' target that generates them,
hence no license headers.
Upayavira
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013, at 08:57 PM, Ali Lown wrote:
> I suspect that license comm
Perfect.
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013, at 03:57 AM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Upayavira,
>
>
> We will put a wiki page together. We will also have the discussion here.
> That said, I would like to select at least three people who sign up to
> shepherd the discussion. Everyone
I'd encourage you to fire up a wiki page and start the discussion here.
I suspect due to te nature of the topic, participants will quickly be
self selecting.
Upayavira
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013, at 10:11 PM, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Michael MacFadden
> wr
urrent situation as Incubator podling I would even have a
> lesser bar. In the situation of Wave - complex technology driven by
> less people with less time - the bar should be very low. But this is
> just my opinion. If you agree, work through the mailinglists and
> nominate peop
Please do remember, that while in person meetups or synchronous hangouts
can be useful, they are also by their nature somewhat exclusive.
Therefore, please use them with restraint, and keep as much discussion,
and all decisions, here on the list.
Thanks! Upayavira
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013, at 01:37
Note he's not subscribed - you'll need to cc.
Upayavira
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013, at 07:51 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote:
> Rob,
>
> I would be interested in continuing this conversation. I have been
> working with the top minds in OT for the past few years. I am excit
In which case, Joseph should send in an ICLA, and we can get the account
sorted. Thx for spotting Yuri.
Upayavira
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013, at 11:39 PM, Yuri Z wrote:
> By the way Joseph, your name is on the list of committers for the Apache
> Wave http://incubator.apache.org/wave/people.html
sitory. If you do send your ICLA as suggested in the above link,
feel free to mail me privately and I will track its arrival.
Upayavira
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013, at 08:49 PM, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> Following from Michael MacFadden's suggestion to put related
> (hopefully integrated) technolog
ts to the ASF Git, etc - your code still gets into
the canonical repo that way.
What matters is regarding collaboration - that the community can
collaborate in a way that it can control and manage. That's why
expecting people to use github would be a no-no, in my view.
Upayavira
On Fri, Ju
Ali, I think we should push this through to the incubator general list
now. I don't think there's a huge benefit in waiting anymore.
Upayavira
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013, at 10:14 PM, Ali Lown wrote:
> > Still here, still following and helping out in the background when Googley
&
1 - 100 of 207 matches
Mail list logo
