+1 (binding) Cheers Lei
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 6:33 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> wrote: > Lei, can you please explicitly cast +1/-1 vote? > > Thanks, > Roman. > > On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Lei Chang <[email protected]> wrote: > > Look good! > > > > Run mvn verify, get: > > > > ***************************************************** > > > > Summary > > > > ------- > > > > Generated at: 2016-01-24T19:50:43-08:00 > > > > Notes: 5 > > > > Binaries: 0 > > > > Archives: 0 > > > > Standards: 2627 > > > > Apache Licensed: 1796 > > > > Generated Documents: 0 > > > > JavaDocs are generated and so license header is optional > > > > Generated files do not required license headers > > > > 0 Unknown Licenses > > > > ******************************* > > > > Unapproved licenses: > > > > ******************************* > > > > Cheers > > > > Lei Chang > > > > On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Caleb Welton <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > First question for me is: > >> > - We have a couple existing jiras on IP clearance, including > >> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-184 > >> > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-207 > >> > > >> > In particular if HAWQ-184 has *not* been resolved then how are we > clear > >> of > >> > our IP issues? I see that there was a commit associated with the > issue, > >> so > >> > perhaps this is just a lack of jira hygiene? > >> > >> I wasn't too eager to resolve 184 until the vote passes, > >> as for 207 -- that ended up being fixed in a different way > >> and I resolve it as not applicable anymore. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Roman. > >> >
