Thanks to all for suggestions and comments. I will graduate DUCC from the sandbox before the next release of DUCC (2.1.0). I'll do svn move before RC1 is made. Jerry
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm +1 for moving DUCC from the Sandbox - it certainly has had a lot of > time and > energy invested in multiple releases, and has been getting quite a bit of > use. > I think the community would appreciate the validation of it being a > regular project. > > Re: formal voting - my view is that voting serves to catalyze consensus > building, and it's of course also there for legal reasons (for releases). > In > this case, it seems pretty obvious to me that there's consensus already > around > moving it from the Sandbox to be a regular project; I think this is > essentially > mostly an SVN move, plus some publicity when it happens (tweeting :-) , > website > updating, news). > > So, it's OK with me to proceed to move it in SVN. > > -Marshall > > On 4/11/2016 11:54 AM, Peter Klügl wrote: > > I think a formal vote with a special mail header and a 72h delay would > > be a good thing. If somebody has reasons against moving it, it is more > > likely that the vote is not missed and that there is enough time to > react. > > > > Best, > > > > Peter > > > > Am 11.04.2016 um 17:32 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho: > >> Thanks Jerry, > >> > >> DUCC is not an incubator project - it is a sub-project of Apache UIMA. > >> > >> My understanding that for the purposes of the ASF, DUCC is already an > >> integral part of the Apache UIMA project. That is reflected in the > >> fact that DUCC versions do not include the "incubator" marker that > >> ASF incubator projects have. > >> > >> I believe moving the project from the sandbox spot in SVN to the > >> "regular" location is entirely our own decision - and that is all > >> that needs to be done. > >> > >> On the website, DUCC is not even listed as part of the UIMA Sandbox > >> (https://uima.apache.org/sandbox.html) but it is rather advertised > >> as a proper part of UIMA under the "Scaleout Frameworks". > >> > >> We can do a formal vote, but actually I think that based on the +1's we > >> have already and the fact that this is not an official ASF action, > >> you can simply move it. > >> > >> @Marshall: what do you think? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> -- Richard > >> > >>> On 11.04.2016, at 17:26, Jaroslaw Cwiklik <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Richard, from what I read to graduate DUCC to UIMA subproject we need a > >>> formal vote: > >>> > >>> Graduation Approval Vote > >>> > >>> To graduate as a subproject, the Mentors > >>> < > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Mentor > > > >>> should > >>> start a VOTE <http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html> thread on > >>> the general > >>> list > >>> < > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/lists.html#general+at+incubator.apache.org > > > >>> proposing > >>> that the IPMC > >>> < > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Incubator+Project+Management+Committee+%28PMC%29 > > > >>> signs > >>> off the graduation of the podling as a subproject. This VOTEs should > only > >>> be started once the project has VOTEd to accept the subproject. > >>> > >>> > >>> Perhaps we should wait until DUCC 2.1.0 is released. Looks like we are > a > >>> few weeks away from the release candidate. After the release I can > formally > >>> put DUCC graduation to a vote. > >>> > >>> Jerry > >>> > >>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Jaroslaw Cwiklik <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> +1 > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 3:24 AM, Peter Klügl < > [email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> +1 > >>>>> > >>>>> Peter > >>>>> > >>>>> Am 10.04.2016 um 01:11 schrieb Richard Eckart de Castilho: > >>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> how about moving UIMA DUCC out of the sandbox and promoting it to > the > >>>>> same level as uimaFIT and RUTA? > >>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- Richard > > > >
