
12

The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
[ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
[ ] +0 I am OK with this
[ ] 0 OK, but...
[ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
13:00 UTC.
Thanks!
Phil

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 08:18:55 0700, Phil Steitz wrote:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
[X] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
Gilles

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


+0
(I would prefer to not see the traffic on the list)
Von: Phil Steitz
Gesendet: Samstag, 16. Januar 2016 16:19
An: Commons Developers List
Betreff: [VOTE] Form a separate TLP based on [math]
The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
[ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
[ ] +0 I am OK with this
[ ] 0 OK, but...
[ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
13:00 UTC.
Thanks!
Phil

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


Phil Steitz < [hidden email]> writes:
>The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
>therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
>TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
>about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
>[ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
>[ ] +0 I am OK with this
>[ ] 0 OK, but...
>[ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
Not sure whether I'm allowed to vote. But if I am: +1
Norman Shapiro

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


+0 I am OK with this
Otmar
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 5:46 PM, < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Phil Steitz < [hidden email]> writes:
>>The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
>>therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
>>TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
>>about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>>
>>[ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
>>[ ] +0 I am OK with this
>>[ ] 0 OK, but...
>>[ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> Not sure whether I'm allowed to vote. But if I am: +1
>
> Norman Shapiro
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


+1
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 10:19 AM Phil Steitz < [hidden email]> wrote:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>
>


On 16.01.16 16:18, Phil Steitz wrote:
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [X] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
Bye, Thomas

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


+0 I am OK with this.
What benefits does being a TLP get over a commonssubproject?  H
On 16 January 2016 at 09:49, Thomas Vandahl < [hidden email]> wrote:
> On 16.01.16 16:18, Phil Steitz wrote:
> > [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> > [X] +0 I am OK with this
> > [ ] 0 OK, but...
> > [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> Bye, Thomas
>
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>
>

OpenPGP: https://hasan.d8u.us/gpg.keySent from my mobile device
Envoyé de mon portable


Le 16/01/2016 16:18, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
> [X] +1 I am in favor of this action
Luc
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>
>

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 8:46 AM, < [hidden email]> wrote:
> Phil Steitz < [hidden email]> writes:
> >The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> >therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> >TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> >about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
> >
> >[ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> >[ ] +0 I am OK with this
> >[ ] 0 OK, but...
> >[ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> Not sure whether I'm allowed to vote. But if I am: +1
>
This reminds me that any Apache Committer is an Apache Commons committer
(mod the current infra ticket about Git). What is the plan for a TLP Math?
All Apache Committers become [math] TPL committers (no change from now)?
Gary
> Norman Shapiro
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>
>

EMail: [hidden email]  [hidden email]
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
< http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition < http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action < http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.comHome: http://garygregory.com/Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory


On 1/16/16 3:41 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 8:46 AM, < [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Phil Steitz < [hidden email]> writes:
>>> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
>>> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
>>> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
>>> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
>>> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
>>> [ ] 0 OK, but...
>>> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>> Not sure whether I'm allowed to vote. But if I am: +1
>>
> This reminds me that any Apache Committer is an Apache Commons committer
> (mod the current infra ticket about Git). What is the plan for a TLP Math?
> All Apache Committers become [math] TPL committers (no change from now)?
That is a question that the new PMC would decide. We also need to
decide who would be on the new PMC. Step 0 is to decide that we
want to form a new PMC at all. Once we have decided that we want to
do that, we can discuss all of these things.
Phil
>
> Gary
>
>
>> Norman Shapiro
>>
>> 
>> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


On 01/16/2016 04:18 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
[X] +1 I am in favor of this action
Thomas
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 11:46 AM < [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Not sure whether I'm allowed to vote. But if I am: +1
>
> Norman Shapiro
>
>
Norman, you're a member of the Commons community. You are *definitely*
allowed to vote. The Commons PMC doesn't discourage nonPMC members from
voting. Take a look at the "binding votes" section here:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.htmlHeck, check out the whole thing. It's a great overview of how (and maybe
more importantly why) we do things here at the ASF with respect to voting.


+0
Emmanuel Bourg
Le 16/01/2016 16:18, Phil Steitz a écrit :
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>


+1
Phil Steitz wrote:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


+1
On Saturday, January 16, 2016, Phil Steitz < [hidden email]> wrote:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email] <javascript:;>
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
> <javascript:;>
>
>


On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Phil Steitz < [hidden email]> wrote:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
>
+1 (nonbinding).
Hen


+1
Ate
On 20160116 16:18, Phil Steitz wrote:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]


20160116 16:18 GMT+01:00 Phil Steitz < [hidden email]>:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
>
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [x] +0 I am OK with this
>
Bye,
Benedikt
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
>
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Phil
>
>
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]
>
>

http://home.apache.org/~britter/http://twitter.com/BenediktRitterhttp://github.com/britter


+0 since I'm not active in MATH
Stefan
On 20160116, Phil Steitz wrote:
> The discussion has thus far been generally favorable. I would like
> therefore to put the proposal to split [math] out into a separate
> TLP to a VOTE. Assuming a favorable vote, we can discuss how to go
> about doing it. Votes, please. All are welcome to vote.
> [ ] +1 I am in favor of this action
> [ ] +0 I am OK with this
> [ ] 0 OK, but...
> [ ] 1 I oppose this action because...
> This VOTE will run a little longer than usual  closing at 20 Jan
> 13:00 UTC.
> Thanks!
> Phil
> 
> To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, email: [hidden email]

To unsubscribe, email: [hidden email]
For additional commands, email: [hidden email]

12
