Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 36516 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2002 02:07:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Jan 2002 02:07:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 22664 invoked by uid 97); 10 Jan 2002 02:07:26 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 22508 invoked by uid 97); 10 Jan 2002 02:07:24 -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 22435 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2002 02:07:23 -0000 Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2002 21:07:14 -0500 From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." Subject: Re: [Vote] ARMI to move In-reply-to: <458473676F1AC74A84EAB2F22004DA6DD874@mail.nextance.com> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/10.0.0.1309 X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On 1/9/02 1:43 PM, "Scott Sanders" wrote: > According to the wesite, you are correct. I thought it was different. > How could it be the other way? That means anyone who can get karma to work in sandbox (which is every Jakarta committer) can therefore be the sole committer for a new project, and vote themselves into Commons. Can't be :) > Scott > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Martin Cooper [mailto:martin.cooper@tumbleweed.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 10:36 AM >> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List >> Subject: Re: [Vote] ARMI to move >> >> >> No, I don't think so. The positive super-majority is based on >> the number of subproject (i.e. Commons) committers, not the >> number of package (i.e. ARMI, in this case) committers. So >> basically, it needs 3/4 of all Commons committers to approve. >> At least, that's how I read it. >> >> -- >> Martin Cooper >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Scott Sanders" >> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" >> Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 10:08 AM >> Subject: RE: [Vote] ARMI to move >> >> >> It looks like you have the positive super majority. We >> should wait a while longer before moving it, so any lingering >> votes can come out. >> >> Scott >> >>> -----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, >> that's what >>> the rules say. However, on checking the Commons charter, it doesn't >>> actually say how many committers are required for a package to be >>> accepted (or if it does, I missed it). The Jakarta rules do, of >>> course. Perhaps this is something we should define? >>> >>> The vote for acceptance, however, is well defined as a positive >>> super-majority. >>> >>> -- >>> Martin Cooper >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Geir Magnusson Jr." >>> To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" >> >>> 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 >> alternative >>>>> 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 >>>>> '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: >>> >>> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org> >> For >> additional commands, >> e-mail: >> >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org> >> For >> additional commands, >> e-mail: >> >> > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > For additional commands, e-mail: > -- Geir Magnusson Jr. geirm@optonline.net System and Software Consulting Be a giant. Take giant steps. Do giant things... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: