Mailing-List: contact continuum-dev-help@maven.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: continuum-dev@maven.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of emmanuel.venisse@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.146.182 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=JAZD6fY0zaKiRWvat6ZfLI0wEIPlUXl4roZD/bmQhXoRkAuR8BZON26nbZ0U9S1g5IwJHnkP27yJEpGJ4O5ZwUs9yWQRZiAB8Lb1aoS2awE/lO2A5QpFd+bg2uxxl4iamdgHA1TvEoaiyhaGUuBF21T21Nf4mxaXivkWfJL4MU8=
Message-ID: <f345f3480801280559xd383d5am18b20a4a272e86aa@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:59:20 +0100
From: "Emmanuel Venisse" <emmanuel.venisse@gmail.com>
To: continuum-dev@maven.apache.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] Graduate Continuum to its own TLP
In-Reply-To: <9E391BF7-5EC4-4DD6-BC33-73CE6268A149@apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_11136_1990394.1201528760192"
References: <46F3E9F7.8020503@venisse.net>
	 <adba96190709231359k312f66eej37b710b74afe9772@mail.gmail.com>
	 <68472C3D-51B9-4C8E-904C-7C9807F37FD7@apache.org>
	 <0A475512-CA07-41AA-B529-476EE2F1F9A0@apache.org>
	 <7D22D9A4-29DE-4AFC-A397-61EC8B9978CC@apache.org>
	 <f345f3480801280540h4ab34f71xbafc647273cf7004@mail.gmail.com>
	 <9E391BF7-5EC4-4DD6-BC33-73CE6268A149@apache.org>

------=_Part_11136_1990394.1201528760192
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

ok.

On Jan 28, 2008 2:44 PM, Brett Porter <bporter@exist.com> wrote:

> Yep, that's the type of proposal. It might be better to look for one
> from Jakarta since that's closer to Continuum's scenario. And the
> description I refer to is entered into the 1st and 3rd paragraph
> (though the description can be more than that if desired). It's really
> the "mission statement" and scope of the project.
>
> On 28/01/2008, at 9:40 PM, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:
>
> > Brett,
> >
> > What do you mean with "proposed project description, and the
> > proposal" ?
> > I thought to send only a proposal like this one:
> >
> http://www.opensubscriber.com/message/openejb-dev@incubator.apache.org/6461007.html
> > Do you think to something else?
> > If it's only that, I think I'll send it this week, maybe the next.
> >
> > Emmanuel
> >
> > On Jan 28, 2008 2:23 PM, Brett Porter <bporter@exist.com> wrote:
> >
> >> So, it seems like we are unanimous in favour of Emmanuel as the
> >> chair,
> >> and by lazy consensus agree to the committer list and initial PMC
> >> below :)
> >>
> >> Emmanuel, will you put together the proposed project description, and
> >> then the proposal for us to vote on?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Brett
> >>
> >> On 05/01/2008, at 10:00 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
> >>
> >>> So the poll for progressing seems in favour.
> >>>
> >>> Before we continue to vote on a proposal to send to the board, we
> >>> need to decide on a description for the project, the initial PMC/
> >>> committers, and a chair.
> >>>
> >>> I would like to nominate Emmanuel as the chair of the project. Are
> >>> there any other nominations?
> >>>
> >>> I have the current committers list as:
> >>> Maria Odea Ching
> >>> Joakim Erdfelt
> >>> Olivier Lamy
> >>> Trygve Laugstol
> >>> Jesse McConnell
> >>> Brett Porter
> >>> Edwin Punzalan
> >>> Carlos Sanchez
> >>> Wendy Smoak
> >>> Rahul Thakur
> >>> Emmanuel Venisse
> >>> Kenney Westerhof
> >>> Andrew Williams
> >>>
> >>> Anyone on that list that doesn't feel they should be a committer?
> >>> Did I miss anyone?
> >>>
> >>> The following have committed only once, or have declared themselves
> >>> emeritus:
> >>> Herve Boutemy
> >>> Dan Diephouse
> >>> Fabrizio Giustina
> >>> Arnaud Heritier
> >>> Lukas Theussl
> >>> Jason van Zyl
> >>>
> >>> Anyone on that list that would like to be included?
> >>>
> >>> Finally - I propose that the initial PMC be equal to the list of
> >>> committers. Any objections or opinions about that?
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Brett
> >>>
> >>> On 20/12/2007, at 5:42 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> So, what's next?
> >>>>
> >>>> This seems generally in favour - now might be a good time to get
> >>>> started on it?
> >>>>
> >>>> From past experience the steps would be:
> >>>> - poll the current maven committers to see who is interested in
> >>>> participating in the TLP
> >>>> - draft a resolution with those committers as the initial PMC
> >>>> - vote on sending the resolution to the board
> >>>>
> >>>> The board next meets in mid-January.
> >>>>
> >>>> Any thoughts on moving forward with this?
> >>>>
> >>>> - Brett
> >>>>
> >>>> On 24/09/2007, at 6:59 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 9/21/07, Emmanuel Venisse <emmanuel@venisse.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> So I think it would be good for Continuum to become a Top Level
> >>>>>> Project at ASF and the continuum community will have more chance
> >>>>>> to grow.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> My concern for the moment is we don't have enough committer from
> >>>>>> different companies, To be stable, at least 3 committers from
> >>>>>> different companies would be good.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It definitely feels like it's time for this to happen, or at least
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> start the process.  Assuming there is general agreement here,
> >>>>> let's
> >>>>> talk about it on dev@maven and see who else might be interested in
> >>>>> joining us in a TLP.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> IMO, anyone who has access to the code now as part of Maven is
> >>>>> welcome
> >>>>> to come along when it moves out, or at any point in the future.
> >>>>> That's how we handled the Tiles move (from Struts) and it worked
> >>>>> well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Wendy
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>

------=_Part_11136_1990394.1201528760192--