Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 4532 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2002 18:48:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Jan 2002 18:48:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 29552 invoked by uid 97); 9 Jan 2002 18:48:24 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 29536 invoked by uid 97); 9 Jan 2002 18:48:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 29523 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2002 18:48:23 -0000 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: RE: [Vote] ARMI to move Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.5762.3 Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 10:43:52 -0800 Message-ID: <458473676F1AC74A84EAB2F22004DA6DD874@mail.nextance.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Vote] ARMI to move Thread-Index: AcGZO8pJs2u9q0nwR8S3tZbDEMEzUAAAbyag From: "Scott Sanders" To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N According to the wesite, you are correct. I thought it was different. Scott > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Cooper [mailto:martin.cooper@tumbleweed.com]=20 > Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 10:36 AM > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [Vote] ARMI to move >=20 >=20 > No, I don't think so. The positive super-majority is based on=20 > the number of subproject (i.e. Commons) committers, not the=20 > number of package (i.e. ARMI, in this case) committers. So=20 > basically, it needs 3/4 of all Commons committers to approve.=20 > At least, that's how I read it. >=20 > -- > Martin Cooper >=20 >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Scott Sanders" > To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" > Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 10:08 AM > Subject: RE: [Vote] ARMI to move >=20 >=20 > It looks like you have the positive super majority. We=20 > should wait a while longer before moving it, so any lingering=20 > votes can come out. >=20 > Scott >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Martin Cooper [mailto:martin.cooper@tumbleweed.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 10:11 AM > > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List > > Subject: Re: [Vote] ARMI to move > > > > > > > Don't you need more active committers? > > > > Interesting question. My initial assumption was that, yes,=20 > that's what=20 > > the rules say. However, on checking the Commons charter, it doesn't=20 > > actually say how many committers are required for a package to be=20 > > accepted (or if it does, I missed it). The Jakarta rules do, of=20 > > course. Perhaps this is something we should define? > > > > The vote for acceptance, however, is well defined as a positive=20 > > super-majority. > > > > -- > > Martin Cooper > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." > > To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List"=20 > > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 7:50 PM > > Subject: Re: [Vote] ARMI to move > > > > > > > Don't you need more active committers? > > > > > > > > > On 1/6/02 6:35 PM, "Paul Hammant" wrote: > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons-sandbox/armi/ > > > > > > > > I have done a lot of work on ARMI and think it is time > > for me to ask > > > > committers to vote for a move of this tool from 'sandbox' > > in to the > > > > main CVS tree. It also needs a rename (ARMI is already > > used in the > > > > context of Java by another academic team). Please do not > > think of > > > > this as a full replacement for RMI. It is merely an=20 > alternative=20 > > > > that bizarely might be most useful (to Avalon) entirely > > inside one > > > > VM. > > > > > > > > With respect to the rename, I think FacadePublisher gives > > the most > > > > meaning, but is not snappy. > > > > > > > > Now, I guess I have no vote myself as I am only a committer to=20 > > > > 'soapbox' but I would be interested to know if know the > > outcome of a > > > > vote from those that do...... > > > > > > > > Two votes: > > > > > > > > 1) for ARMI being renamed to FacadePublisher (or other) > > > > > > > > 2) for migrating from 'soapbox' to main CVS. > > > > > > > > Thanks in advance.... > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > - Paul H > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Geir Magnusson Jr. > > geirm@optonline.net > > > System and Software Consulting > > > "He who throws mud only loses ground." - Fat Albert > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org> > > For > > additional commands, > > e-mail: > > > > >=20 > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail:=20 > unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org> > For=20 > additional commands,=20 > e-mail: >=20 >=20 >=20 > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: =20 > unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org> > For=20 > additional commands,=20 > e-mail: >=20 >=20 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: