Activity

["eberhard speer jr." <se...@ducis.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

What's going on ?
Is everybody off to the beach or did y'all head for the proverbial
mountains when you read the release documentation Bertrand pointed out ?

OpenDDR released new resources (1.20) 4 days ago.

So, what are the plans/suggestions on how to proceed with the release ?

esjr
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSBKhNAAoJEOxywXcFLKYcuDAH/1f2E/ysMdT5ecyxKgR8Fns1
x3kuimGNqYaTKRSkWGE2nKT95lJWaezEKN74Vn2vZM5wASl+XTPOlXatQ8yfB59N
n+bXJoZ9y4qYzwwSvtTSF4S0JVjQH+t/kLS2IK5EP22sAUGT5YyI5h9yUOCJ3iyR
PG09lLwATyL4jbkYViV3UInQfCvE9POrqJ+TTn6jbMaPGUO57QCF/GFgn6p0qijA
uCjO7sm7dP4hoT0yTTniRCzXAGMnZq2F3hH2letNMfgmJ3TtdysoV5hwb4f8PJ7k
H3dhplHxdDaF2b2DWI7Yjgfy6lX2E9MXL+arE3hMWnCWmVgNJJLZgedduZsqAzI=
=Awkz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Activity

[Werner Keil <we...@gmail.com>]

Eberhard/Bertrand/all,

I haven't followed that in detail (sorry, but I also have to help
especially Apache getting its act together with JSR-362, the Java Portlet
3.0 API where there's been a discrepancy between the "Apache Way" of how it
was developed and how people then ended up using the Portlet-API[?])
although especially to the Portlet EG I spoke about DeviceMap and possible
synergies.

You should be able to see who committed that, and if people involved in
OpenDDR commit code here (I didn't activate my user, so I don't commit to
the repository yet, but others like Stefano have an @apache.org mail ID by
now, so they should have commit rights, too)

How about dual-licensing stuff, I know we keep talking about that day in
and out at JCP.org (EC, JCP.next WGs) and some JSRs especially those going
into Java EE 7 practice that quite often.

So if an original author and committer has the IP right to contribute
something (I'm not talking about a R/O user of GitHub who would copy it
from OpenDDR and then funnel it over into the DeviceMap repository) to
both, why would you have to remove that?

That'll kill the whole progress here and it's not like we're boasting with
activity or public recognition anyway[?]

Werner

On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:

> Hi Eberhard,
>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:29 AM, eberhard speer jr. <se...@ducis.net>
> wrote:
> > ...Is everybody off to the beach...
>
> I've been drowned by other work rather than water so far ;-)
>
> > ...OpenDDR released new resources (1.20) 4 days ago....
>
> BTW, it looks like some of the data that's been committed to our svn
> repository recently comes from OpenDDR, but hasn't been explicitly
> donated by them, is that correct? If yes I'm afraid we'll have to
> remove that unless there's an explicit donation (or commits by someone
> who's explicitly approved by OpenDDR, which is only Werner so far
> AFAIK), as Apache only accepts voluntary contributions.
>
> >
> > ...So, what are the plans/suggestions on how to proceed with the release
> ?...
>
> I'd say resolve the above question about the data provenance and then
> we can proceed. It's fine, and probably better, to release the C# and
> Java modules separately, as their target audience is distinct.
>
> -Bertrand
>

Re: Activity

[Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>]

Hi Eberhard,

On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:29 AM, eberhard speer jr. <se...@ducis.net> wrote:
> ...Is everybody off to the beach...

I've been drowned by other work rather than water so far ;-)

> ...OpenDDR released new resources (1.20) 4 days ago....

BTW, it looks like some of the data that's been committed to our svn
repository recently comes from OpenDDR, but hasn't been explicitly
donated by them, is that correct? If yes I'm afraid we'll have to
remove that unless there's an explicit donation (or commits by someone
who's explicitly approved by OpenDDR, which is only Werner so far
AFAIK), as Apache only accepts voluntary contributions.

>
> ...So, what are the plans/suggestions on how to proceed with the release ?...

I'd say resolve the above question about the data provenance and then
we can proceed. It's fine, and probably better, to release the C# and
Java modules separately, as their target audience is distinct.

-Bertrand