You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu> on 2005/07/14 19:07:22 UTC
VOTE: IBM web console donation
Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
[ ] Send to Apache incubator
[ ] Other (please specify)
I don't know that we've preceisely defined a "restricted
committer", except insofar as we use an ACL so they can commit to their
incobator area but not to the rest of Geronimo. We also haven't defined
how many committers we'd accept in either case.
Still, it seems like the code is available (or quite close to it),
and we've had extensive discussions on the best general approach to
donated code, so I'd like to see if we can start to settle this and get
our hands on the console code. We can continue to work on our
expectations for "restricted committers" if the vote goes that way.
Thanks,
Aaron
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Srinath Perera <he...@gmail.com>.
[+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
Thanks
Srinath
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by David Blevins <da...@visi.com>.
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
[ ] Send to Apache incubator
[ ] Other (please specify)
-David
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@savoirtech.com>.
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
[ ] Send to Apache incubator
[ ] Other (please specify)
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On 7/14/2005 10:44 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>Shoot, I should have included that:
>
>[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
>[X] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
>[ ] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
>[ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
>[ ] Send to Apache incubator
>[ ] Other (please specify)
>
>
I think we should offer the new people who want to work on the console
the opportunity to show us how well they would work within the Geronimo
community.
Regards,
Alan
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 14, 2005, at 1:44 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
I support the following in order to help grow our codebase and
community (as long as we don't call it 'incubator') :
> [+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
I support this and the more general case of "put in geronimo where
appropriate and get patches", as this is our status quo anyway :
> [+1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
I support the following with an understanding of new committers
working in this area to start - extending trust - and have them work
with others for other parts of the codebase :
> [+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> [+1] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
And for the rest :
> [-1] Send to Apache incubator
> [N/A] Other (please specify)
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>
>> +1 "Other" geronimo/sandbox/web-console; no committers; use patches
>>
>> -dain
>>
>> On Jul 14, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
>>>
>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
>>> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
>>> [ ] Other (please specify)
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 17, 2005, at 2:46 PM, matt@hogstrom.org wrote:
> On the issue of the name I vote admin-console and not include the
> donor's name
> (ala ibm-web-console). Not sure of the policy.
I'd like to not persist donor names in our repo structure if the
donor doesn't want it, and probably ever. (For the uncurable pedants
among us, yes, that's different from what I had illustrated in an
example during our conversations...)
We should certainly mention it in the initial checkin, so it can be
linked back to the contribution documentation in the Apache Incubator.
geir
>
> Matt
>
> On Sunday 17 July 2005 12:09, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> On Jul 17, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>>> and we can now place into our svn repository and get to work.
>>>>
>>>> I'd be happy to take the codebase in ASAP, and Aaron can tally the
>>>> vote/poll for "operating mode" and we can then resolve that in
>>>> parallel w/ beginning work. How does that sound?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, you've neatly dodged the question of where in SVN to place
>>> it.
>>>
>>
>> Not a dodge - that was the second aspect of the vote thread and I
>> wanted to let you complete it.
>>
>>
>>> By my count, the poll has produced a tie (bearing in mind that a -1
>>> does not appear to be a veto on this issue):
>>>
>>> Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
>>> +1 Alan +1 Aaron +1 Dims +1 Jeff +1 John +1 Srinath +1 Geir -1
>>> Dain
>>> Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
>>> +1 Aaron +1 Geir +1 Jacek +1 David B +1 Dain +1 David J
>>>
>>> The other two options totaled 1, 1, and -1. So I think it's
>>> safe
>>> to say that this is the decision we need to make. If we want
>>> something
>>> immediate, I recommend we put it in the sandbox with no additional
>>> commit
>>> access, and then if we ultimately decide to go the route of
>>> restricted
>>> committers, we can svn move it out of the main trunk.
>>>
>>
>> Yes - please do that. That is compatible with our policy of
>> accepting code, and no one was against accepting the code. (This is
>> irrespective of the committer issues under discussion)
>>
>> We can then hopefully tie up the committer issue in parallel.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> geir
>>
>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <jl...@apache.org>.
matt@hogstrom.org wrote:
> On the issue of the name I vote admin-console and not include the donor's name
> (ala ibm-web-console). Not sure of the policy.
+1.
> Matt
Jacek
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by ma...@hogstrom.org.
On the issue of the name I vote admin-console and not include the donor's name
(ala ibm-web-console). Not sure of the policy.
Matt
On Sunday 17 July 2005 12:09, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >> and we can now place into our svn repository and get to work.
> >>
> >> I'd be happy to take the codebase in ASAP, and Aaron can tally the
> >> vote/poll for "operating mode" and we can then resolve that in
> >> parallel w/ beginning work. How does that sound?
> >
> > Well, you've neatly dodged the question of where in SVN to place
> > it.
>
> Not a dodge - that was the second aspect of the vote thread and I
> wanted to let you complete it.
>
> > By my count, the poll has produced a tie (bearing in mind that a -1
> > does not appear to be a veto on this issue):
> >
> > Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> > +1 Alan +1 Aaron +1 Dims +1 Jeff +1 John +1 Srinath +1 Geir -1
> > Dain
> > Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
> > +1 Aaron +1 Geir +1 Jacek +1 David B +1 Dain +1 David J
> >
> > The other two options totaled 1, 1, and -1. So I think it's safe
> > to say that this is the decision we need to make. If we want
> > something
> > immediate, I recommend we put it in the sandbox with no additional
> > commit
> > access, and then if we ultimately decide to go the route of restricted
> > committers, we can svn move it out of the main trunk.
>
> Yes - please do that. That is compatible with our policy of
> accepting code, and no one was against accepting the code. (This is
> irrespective of the committer issues under discussion)
>
> We can then hopefully tie up the committer issue in parallel.
>
> Thanks
>
> geir
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <jl...@apache.org>.
Aaron Mulder wrote:
> If we want something immediate, I recommend we put it in the sandbox with no additional commit
> access, and then if we ultimately decide to go the route of restricted
> committers, we can svn move it out of the main trunk.
+1, but...
The question is how should take care of polishing the donation before we
check it in to the repo? I think the donor who would then be showing
your commitment for the project and start your contribution. That was my
goal when I commented the JIRA issue with the donation.
> Aaron
Jacek
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 17, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>> and we can now place into our svn repository and get to work.
>>
>> I'd be happy to take the codebase in ASAP, and Aaron can tally the
>> vote/poll for "operating mode" and we can then resolve that in
>> parallel w/ beginning work. How does that sound?
>>
>
> Well, you've neatly dodged the question of where in SVN to place
> it.
Not a dodge - that was the second aspect of the vote thread and I
wanted to let you complete it.
> By my count, the poll has produced a tie (bearing in mind that a -1
> does not appear to be a veto on this issue):
>
> Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> +1 Alan +1 Aaron +1 Dims +1 Jeff +1 John +1 Srinath +1 Geir -1
> Dain
> Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
> +1 Aaron +1 Geir +1 Jacek +1 David B +1 Dain +1 David J
>
> The other two options totaled 1, 1, and -1. So I think it's safe
> to say that this is the decision we need to make. If we want
> something
> immediate, I recommend we put it in the sandbox with no additional
> commit
> access, and then if we ultimately decide to go the route of restricted
> committers, we can svn move it out of the main trunk.
Yes - please do that. That is compatible with our policy of
accepting code, and no one was against accepting the code. (This is
irrespective of the committer issues under discussion)
We can then hopefully tie up the committer issue in parallel.
Thanks
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
Aaron Mulder wrote, On 7/17/2005 10:49 PM:
>On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>
>>and we can now place into our svn repository and get to work.
>>
>>I'd be happy to take the codebase in ASAP, and Aaron can tally the
>>vote/poll for "operating mode" and we can then resolve that in
>>parallel w/ beginning work. How does that sound?
>>
>>
>
> Well, you've neatly dodged the question of where in SVN to place
>it. By my count, the poll has produced a tie (bearing in mind that a -1
>does not appear to be a veto on this issue):
>
>Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> +1 Alan +1 Aaron +1 Dims +1 Jeff +1 John +1 Srinath +1 Geir -1 Dain
>Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
> +1 Aaron +1 Geir +1 Jacek +1 David B +1 Dain +1 David J
>
> The other two options totaled 1, 1, and -1. So I think it's safe
>to say that this is the decision we need to make. If we want something
>immediate, I recommend we put it in the sandbox with no additional commit
>access, and then if we ultimately decide to go the route of restricted
>committers, we can svn move it out of the main trunk.
>
For my vote, I don't care if it's sandbox or incubator. I recommend
that we remove the word "ibm" from the name.
Regards,
Alan
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> and we can now place into our svn repository and get to work.
>
> I'd be happy to take the codebase in ASAP, and Aaron can tally the
> vote/poll for "operating mode" and we can then resolve that in
> parallel w/ beginning work. How does that sound?
Well, you've neatly dodged the question of where in SVN to place
it. By my count, the poll has produced a tie (bearing in mind that a -1
does not appear to be a veto on this issue):
Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
+1 Alan +1 Aaron +1 Dims +1 Jeff +1 John +1 Srinath +1 Geir -1 Dain
Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
+1 Aaron +1 Geir +1 Jacek +1 David B +1 Dain +1 David J
The other two options totaled 1, 1, and -1. So I think it's safe
to say that this is the decision we need to make. If we want something
immediate, I recommend we put it in the sandbox with no additional commit
access, and then if we ultimately decide to go the route of restricted
committers, we can svn move it out of the main trunk.
Aaron
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
It was clear that there were no votes against accepting the codebase
from IBM for the console.
The code has been submitted to us via JIRA issue
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-762
and we can now place into our svn repository and get to work.
I'd be happy to take the codebase in ASAP, and Aaron can tally the
vote/poll for "operating mode" and we can then resolve that in
parallel w/ beginning work. How does that sound?
geir
On Jul 16, 2005, at 9:06 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> I've eventually decided that
> -- patches is what our standard policy is right now, this is "no
> change in policy" + "yes to the console"
> --The people objecting to immediate unrestricted commit have a real
> point
> -- we have an unbounded ability to think of bad scenarios with all
> the immediate commit possibilities
>
> -- the main objections to patches are really that it makes things
> harder for either the donor or us, and we may be able to find
> technical solutions such as svk for this.
>
> So, I'm voting for accepting the console + patches + mentors to
> apply the patches quickly.
>
> I'm unclear if the end result of this poll/vote/bikeshed/??? is
> that we have voted to accept the console donation. If not, can we
> please vote yes, like, right away?
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Jul 14, 2005, at 10:44 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
>
>> Shoot, I should have included that:
>>
>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
>> [ +1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
>> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
>> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
>> [ ] Other (please specify)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Aaron
>>
>> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>>
>>> +1 "Other" geronimo/sandbox/web-console; no committers; use patches
>>>
>>> -dain
>>>
>>> On Jul 14, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
>>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted
>>>> committers
>>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
>>>> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
>>>> [ ] Other (please specify)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
I've eventually decided that
-- patches is what our standard policy is right now, this is "no change
in policy" + "yes to the console"
--The people objecting to immediate unrestricted commit have a real
point
-- we have an unbounded ability to think of bad scenarios with all the
immediate commit possibilities
-- the main objections to patches are really that it makes things
harder for either the donor or us, and we may be able to find technical
solutions such as svk for this.
So, I'm voting for accepting the console + patches + mentors to apply
the patches quickly.
I'm unclear if the end result of this poll/vote/bikeshed/??? is that we
have voted to accept the console donation. If not, can we please vote
yes, like, right away?
thanks
david jencks
On Jul 14, 2005, at 10:44 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> Shoot, I should have included that:
>
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> [ +1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
> [ ] Other (please specify)
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
>> +1 "Other" geronimo/sandbox/web-console; no committers; use patches
>>
>> -dain
>>
>> On Jul 14, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>
>>> Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
>>>
>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
>>> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
>>> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
>>> [ ] Other (please specify)
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Davanum Srinivas <da...@gmail.com>.
[+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
[+0] Send to Apache incubator
[+0] Other (please specify)
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
To answer myself, I would be OK going more than one way:
[-1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
[-1] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
[+0] Send to Apache incubator
[ ] Other (please specify)
And I should clarify that I'm not committed to "closing the issue"
after this vote -- I'd like to see where everyone stands and if necessary
narrow the field for more conversation and more votes. But I do feel that
we need to move forward and the initial discussion thread seems to have
made the progress it's going to make.
Thanks,
Aaron
> On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> > +1 "Other" geronimo/sandbox/web-console; no committers; use patches
> >
> > -dain
> >
> > On Jul 14, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >
> > > Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
> > >
> > > [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> > > [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> > > [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> > > [ ] Send to Apache incubator
> > > [ ] Other (please specify)
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Jacek Laskowski <jl...@apache.org>.
Aaron Mulder wrote:
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> [+1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
> [ ] Other (please specify)
Jacek
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 17, 2005, at 4:49 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> Dain Sundstrom wrote, On 7/15/2005 11:18 PM:
>
>
>> I think we have the cart before the horse on the geronimo/
>> incubator/* choices. We should have a discussion on how
>> exactally this will work and what the policies are and then vote
>> to decide that we want to create our own incubator inside of
>> Geronimo. For example, what exactly does "restricted" commit
>> mean, what are the graduation criteria, and so on. I suppose we
>> can just crib off the incubator policies to figure out what kind
>> of policies are necessary (I would assume that is would be a pure
>> subset of the incubator rules).
>>
>
>
> Restricted commit - committer access that is restricted to a
> specific SVN tree in the geronimo/sandbox. Work outside the tree
> should be done by the mentor.
>
> Graduation criteria - this would still need to be worked out
> regardless of the staging process. I would say when the tream, the
> initial contributors and the Geronimo mentors, feel it's ready a
> public vote would take place on the dev list.
The only issues for PMC list would be any personal discussion on the
committers. (I know you know that, just wanted to be clear for
others...)
geir
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
Dain Sundstrom wrote, On 7/15/2005 11:18 PM:
> I think we have the cart before the horse on the geronimo/incubator/*
> choices. We should have a discussion on how exactally this will work
> and what the policies are and then vote to decide that we want to
> create our own incubator inside of Geronimo. For example, what
> exactly does "restricted" commit mean, what are the graduation
> criteria, and so on. I suppose we can just crib off the incubator
> policies to figure out what kind of policies are necessary (I would
> assume that is would be a pure subset of the incubator rules).
Restricted commit - committer access that is restricted to a specific
SVN tree in the geronimo/sandbox. Work outside the tree should be done
by the mentor.
Graduation criteria - this would still need to be worked out regardless
of the staging process. I would say when the tream, the initial
contributors and the Geronimo mentors, feel it's ready a public vote
would take place on the dev list.
Regards,
Alan
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
On Jul 15, 2005, at 11:18 AM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> I didn't realize this was a poll
>
> [-1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> [-1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> [+1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
> [-1] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> [+0] Send to Apache incubator
> [ ] Other (please specify)
>
> I think we have the cart before the horse on the geronimo/incubator/
> * choices. We should have a discussion on how exactally this will
> work and what the policies are and then vote to decide that we want
> to create our own incubator inside of Geronimo.
I don't think we want to create our own incubator. it was just a
choice for the path.
> For example, what exactly does "restricted" commit mean,
I thought the general understanding was commit restricted to that
part of the SVN repo.
> what are the graduation criteria, and so on.
Read the last few days of discussion.
> I suppose we can just crib off the incubator policies to figure
> out what kind of policies are necessary (I would assume that is
> would be a pure subset of the incubator rules).
It's not an incubator :)
>
> I dislike votes that implicitly grant permission to do something we
> have not discussed or more importantly voted on. Kind of like
> throwing an expensive weapons system on an unrelated environmental
> bill.
Boy howdy! Don't you know it...
geir
>
> -dain
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
I didn't realize this was a poll
[-1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[-1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
[-1] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
[+0] Send to Apache incubator
[ ] Other (please specify)
I think we have the cart before the horse on the geronimo/incubator/*
choices. We should have a discussion on how exactally this will work
and what the policies are and then vote to decide that we want to
create our own incubator inside of Geronimo. For example, what
exactly does "restricted" commit mean, what are the graduation
criteria, and so on. I suppose we can just crib off the incubator
policies to figure out what kind of policies are necessary (I would
assume that is would be a pure subset of the incubator rules).
I dislike votes that implicitly grant permission to do something we
have not discussed or more importantly voted on. Kind of like
throwing an expensive weapons system on an unrelated environmental bill.
-dain
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[+1] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
[ ] Send to Apache incubator
[ ] Other (please specify)
-dain
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by si...@insession.com.
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> [+1] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
> [ ] Other (please specify)
>
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
Shoot, I should have included that:
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/sandbox/web-console; patches not committers
[ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
[ ] Send to Apache incubator
[ ] Other (please specify)
Thanks,
Aaron
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> +1 "Other" geronimo/sandbox/web-console; no committers; use patches
>
> -dain
>
> On Jul 14, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
> > Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
> >
> > [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> > [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> > [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> > [ ] Send to Apache incubator
> > [ ] Other (please specify)
>
>
>
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
+1 "Other" geronimo/sandbox/web-console; no committers; use patches
-dain
On Jul 14, 2005, at 10:07 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
>
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
> [ ] Other (please specify)
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by Aaron Mulder <am...@alumni.princeton.edu>.
Options including "geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console" mean "add a
directory called incubator next to trunk in Geronimo SVN and add the
donation to a new subdirectory of that".
Options including "Send to Apache incubator" mean "add a new project to
incubator.apache.org".
I'm open to a new name for the Geronimo SVN subdirectory next to trunk.
Aaron
On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> I think that the idea was that it actually does go through the Incubator.
>
> On 7/14/2005 10:49 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> > could you please not call it "incubator"? It's not and it's
> > confusing. I also think that we should be a little clearer on the
> > guidelines for dealing with the options below (like the ongoing
> > conversation).
> >
> > On Jul 14, 2005, at 1:07 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> >
> >> Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
> >>
> >> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> >> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> >> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> >> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
> >> [ ] Other (please specify)
> >>
> >> I don't know that we've preceisely defined a "restricted
> >> committer", except insofar as we use an ACL so they can commit to their
> >> incobator area but not to the rest of Geronimo. We also haven't
> >> defined
> >> how many committers we'd accept in either case.
> >>
> >> Still, it seems like the code is available (or quite close to it),
> >> and we've had extensive discussions on the best general approach to
> >> donated code, so I'd like to see if we can start to settle this and get
> >> our hands on the console code. We can continue to work on our
> >> expectations for "restricted committers" if the vote goes that way.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Aaron
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
I think that the idea was that it actually does go through the Incubator.
On 7/14/2005 10:49 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> could you please not call it "incubator"? It's not and it's
> confusing. I also think that we should be a little clearer on the
> guidelines for dealing with the options below (like the ongoing
> conversation).
>
> On Jul 14, 2005, at 1:07 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>
>> Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
>>
>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
>> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
>> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
>> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
>> [ ] Other (please specify)
>>
>> I don't know that we've preceisely defined a "restricted
>> committer", except insofar as we use an ACL so they can commit to their
>> incobator area but not to the rest of Geronimo. We also haven't
>> defined
>> how many committers we'd accept in either case.
>>
>> Still, it seems like the code is available (or quite close to it),
>> and we've had extensive discussions on the best general approach to
>> donated code, so I'd like to see if we can start to settle this and get
>> our hands on the console code. We can continue to work on our
>> expectations for "restricted committers" if the vote goes that way.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Aaron
>>
>>
>
Re: VOTE: IBM web console donation
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>.
could you please not call it "incubator"? It's not and it's
confusing. I also think that we should be a little clearer on the
guidelines for dealing with the options below (like the ongoing
conversation).
On Jul 14, 2005, at 1:07 PM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
> Please vote for the disposition of the IBM web console:
>
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; add full committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/incubator/ibm-web-console; restricted committers
> [ ] Add to geronimo/trunk/applications/web-console; full committers
> [ ] Send to Apache incubator
> [ ] Other (please specify)
>
> I don't know that we've preceisely defined a "restricted
> committer", except insofar as we use an ACL so they can commit to
> their
> incobator area but not to the rest of Geronimo. We also haven't
> defined
> how many committers we'd accept in either case.
>
> Still, it seems like the code is available (or quite close to it),
> and we've had extensive discussions on the best general approach to
> donated code, so I'd like to see if we can start to settle this and
> get
> our hands on the console code. We can continue to work on our
> expectations for "restricted committers" if the vote goes that way.
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org