You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by anita kulshreshtha <a_...@yahoo.com> on 2006/12/21 23:57:59 UTC
Adopt a spec?
On Dec 21, 2006, at 1:50 PM, David Blevins wrote:
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--vote--Release-geronimo-jpa_3.0_spec-1.0-p8013384.html
> I like voting on binaries for most our stuff as our build is
> massively complex. But in this case I figured I'd give the "do you
> trust me to build/publish" angle a try as these are tiny little
> jars that aren't complicated and it's way easier to just run the
> maven publish command on them after the vote than it is to create a
> "staging" build for each one and figuring out a non-trivial way to
> publish them later.
>
IMHO, specs are a perfect candidate for adopt a spec program. Any
PMCer (committer?) gets to adopt one. And yes it does not get named
after them ;-) It all comes down to trust.. WDYT?
Thanks
Anita
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Adopt a spec?
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
If there are volunteers that would be great. Heh, I'll volunteer for
EJB 2.1 :)
On Dec 21, 2006, at 5:57 PM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>
> On Dec 21, 2006, at 1:50 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--vote--Release-geronimo-
> jpa_3.0_spec-1.0-p8013384.html
>> I like voting on binaries for most our stuff as our build is
>> massively complex. But in this case I figured I'd give the "do you
>> trust me to build/publish" angle a try as these are tiny little
>> jars that aren't complicated and it's way easier to just run the
>> maven publish command on them after the vote than it is to create a
>> "staging" build for each one and figuring out a non-trivial way to
>> publish them later.
>>
> IMHO, specs are a perfect candidate for adopt a spec program. Any
> PMCer (committer?) gets to adopt one. And yes it does not get named
> after them ;-) It all comes down to trust.. WDYT?
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
Re: Adopt a spec?
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
On Dec 29, 2006, at 5:24 PM, Dain Sundstrom wrote:
> On Dec 29, 2006, at 3:18 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> I assume it was intended to distribute the load of managing the
>> specs. I don't see that working too well though...
>
> Cuz there isn't enough work to distribute...
Agreed.
--jason
Re: Adopt a spec?
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
On Dec 29, 2006, at 3:18 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> I assume it was intended to distribute the load of managing the
> specs. I don't see that working too well though...
Cuz there isn't enough work to distribute...
-dain
Re: Adopt a spec?
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
I assume it was intended to distribute the load of managing the
specs. I don't see that working too well though...
--jason
On Dec 28, 2006, at 2:14 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
> On Dec 22, 2006, at 7:26 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
>>
>> On Dec 22, 2006, at 4:06 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>>
>>> I don't get it... why do we need an adopt a spec program? I'm
>>> not really sure what it is... but it doesn't really sound good. :-\
>>>
>>> --jason
>>
>> It was a suggestion on how to parcel them out...kind of like adopt
>> a highway program :)
>
> What problem are we trying to solve by instituting the adopt a spec
> program?
>
>
> Regards,
> Alan
>
>
Re: Adopt a spec?
Posted by "Alan D. Cabrera" <li...@toolazydogs.com>.
On Dec 22, 2006, at 7:26 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote:
>
> On Dec 22, 2006, at 4:06 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>> I don't get it... why do we need an adopt a spec program? I'm not
>> really sure what it is... but it doesn't really sound good. :-\
>>
>> --jason
>
> It was a suggestion on how to parcel them out...kind of like adopt
> a highway program :)
What problem are we trying to solve by instituting the adopt a spec
program?
Regards,
Alan
Re: Adopt a spec?
Posted by Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>.
On Dec 22, 2006, at 4:06 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
> I don't get it... why do we need an adopt a spec program? I'm not
> really sure what it is... but it doesn't really sound good. :-\
>
> --jason
It was a suggestion on how to parcel them out...kind of like adopt a
highway program :)
Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org
Re: Adopt a spec?
Posted by Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>.
I don't get it... why do we need an adopt a spec program? I'm not
really sure what it is... but it doesn't really sound good. :-\
--jason
On Dec 21, 2006, at 2:57 PM, anita kulshreshtha wrote:
>
> On Dec 21, 2006, at 1:50 PM, David Blevins wrote:
> http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--vote--Release-geronimo-
> jpa_3.0_spec-1.0-p8013384.html
>> I like voting on binaries for most our stuff as our build is
>> massively complex. But in this case I figured I'd give the "do you
>> trust me to build/publish" angle a try as these are tiny little
>> jars that aren't complicated and it's way easier to just run the
>> maven publish command on them after the vote than it is to create a
>> "staging" build for each one and figuring out a non-trivial way to
>> publish them later.
>>
> IMHO, specs are a perfect candidate for adopt a spec program. Any
> PMCer (committer?) gets to adopt one. And yes it does not get named
> after them ;-) It all comes down to trust.. WDYT?
>
> Thanks
> Anita
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com