Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-5 : David Tanzer's proof-of-concept component model

[Francisco Andrades Grassi <fa...@nextj.com>]

+1

On Thu, 2005-09-29 at 10:17 +0200, Enrico Migliore wrote:
> +1
> 
> > David Tanzer has offered his proof-of-concept component model to the  
> > project.  It can be found here :
> >
> > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5
> >
> > [ ] +1 Accept the code into the project
> > [ ] -1 Don't accept the code.  Reason :
> >
> >
> > ------
> >
> > Notes :
> >
> > 1) Yes, this is formal, but we want a clear audit trail into the  
> > project, and clear acceptance decisions
> > 2) I normally would put a 3 day review period, but this code is small  
> > and I want to use this to test the process
> > 3) Once we accept (I expect we will) ( and if David gets his Bulk  
> > Contrib Agreement and Software Grant in!) we'll put  in sandbox and  
> > away we go...
> >
> > Thanks for the patience
> >
> > geir
> >
> >
-- 
Francisco Andrades Grassi
www.nextj.com
Tlf: +58-414-125-7415

Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-5 : David Tanzer's proof-of-concept component model

[Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>]

acoliver@apache.org wrote:
> +1 code is good.

+1 to accepting and +1 to aco's statement.

> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 29, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Peter Edworthy wrote:
>>
>>> 0 - Not got time to check the code at the moment
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> 2) I normally would put a 3 day review period, but this code is  
>>>>>> small
>>>>>> and I want to use this to test the process
>>>>>>
>>>
>>> Can we go for an any objections version then ?
>>
>>
>> I don't understand the question.  If there are objections, feel free  
>> to state.
>>
>> Note that this isn't a vote on making a technology decision, but only  
>> a vote on whether or not we want to bring this code into our svn  
>> repository.  I'm sorry I wasn't clear about that.
>>
>> Again - this is about us bringing the code in, not making a  
>> commitment to use it in the project, or any judgement about it's  
>> technical feasability or usefulness.  that's a broader discussion.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Or prohaps only email Geir?
>>
>>
>> Anything that is discussion about the technology should be on the dev  
>> list.  Any concerns that one would be uncomfortable discussing in  
>> public that are relevant to the project as a whole should go to  
>> harmony-ppmc, and if it's a personal issue - maybe you wish to call  
>> me a putz or something - either personal or /dev/null :)
>>
>> geir
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Just seems like a lot of mail
>>>
>>> Pete
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
Stefano.

Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-5 : David Tanzer's proof-of-concept component model

[ac...@apache.org]

+1 code is good.

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> 
> On Sep 29, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Peter Edworthy wrote:
> 
>> 0 - Not got time to check the code at the moment
>>
>>
>>>>> 2) I normally would put a 3 day review period, but this code is  small
>>>>> and I want to use this to test the process
>>>>>
>>
>> Can we go for an any objections version then ?
> 
> 
> I don't understand the question.  If there are objections, feel free  to 
> state.
> 
> Note that this isn't a vote on making a technology decision, but only  a 
> vote on whether or not we want to bring this code into our svn  
> repository.  I'm sorry I wasn't clear about that.
> 
> Again - this is about us bringing the code in, not making a  commitment 
> to use it in the project, or any judgement about it's  technical 
> feasability or usefulness.  that's a broader discussion.
> 
> 
>>
>> Or prohaps only email Geir?
> 
> 
> Anything that is discussion about the technology should be on the dev  
> list.  Any concerns that one would be uncomfortable discussing in  
> public that are relevant to the project as a whole should go to  
> harmony-ppmc, and if it's a personal issue - maybe you wish to call  me 
> a putz or something - either personal or /dev/null :)
> 
> geir
> 
> 
>>
>> Just seems like a lot of mail
>>
>> Pete
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Andrew C. Oliver
SuperLink Software, Inc.

Java to Excel using POI
http://www.superlinksoftware.com/services/poi
Commercial support including features added/implemented, bugs fixed.

Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-5 : David Tanzer's proof-of-concept component model

["Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>]

On Sep 29, 2005, at 10:24 AM, Peter Edworthy wrote:

> 0 - Not got time to check the code at the moment
>
>
>>>> 2) I normally would put a 3 day review period, but this code is  
>>>> small
>>>> and I want to use this to test the process
>>>>
>
> Can we go for an any objections version then ?

I don't understand the question.  If there are objections, feel free  
to state.

Note that this isn't a vote on making a technology decision, but only  
a vote on whether or not we want to bring this code into our svn  
repository.  I'm sorry I wasn't clear about that.

Again - this is about us bringing the code in, not making a  
commitment to use it in the project, or any judgement about it's  
technical feasability or usefulness.  that's a broader discussion.


>
> Or prohaps only email Geir?

Anything that is discussion about the technology should be on the dev  
list.  Any concerns that one would be uncomfortable discussing in  
public that are relevant to the project as a whole should go to  
harmony-ppmc, and if it's a personal issue - maybe you wish to call  
me a putz or something - either personal or /dev/null :)

geir


>
> Just seems like a lot of mail
>
> Pete
>
>

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org

Re: [vote] Accept JIRA contribution HARMONY-5 : David Tanzer's proof-of-concept component model

[Peter Edworthy <pe...@edworthy.org>]

0 - Not got time to check the code at the moment

>> > 2) I normally would put a 3 day review period, but this code is small
>> > and I want to use this to test the process

Can we go for an any objections version then ?

Or prohaps only email Geir?

Just seems like a lot of mail

Pete