[RDF] Graduated from the Incubator but Releases remain in Incubator Dist SVN

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

You still have Commons RDF releases in the Incubator’s area of SVN - 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/ 


Please plan to move or remove these soon.

Thank you!

Regards,
Dave

Foundation Voting

[Dave Fisher]

Hi -

Does Comdev control the page /foundation/voting.html?

A member of the Apache OpenOffice community pointed out that the following 
phrase discourages participation:

Who is permitted to vote is, to some extent, a community-specific thing. 
However, the basic rule is that only PMC members have binding votes, and all 
others are either discouraged from voting (to keep the noise down) or else have 
their votes considered of an indicative or advisory nature only.

I think that this should be rewritten as:

Who is permitted to vote is, to some extent, a community-specific thing. 
However, the basic rule is that only PMC members have binding votes, and all 
other votes are advisory.

It has been reported that people are discouraged from participating with the 
“to keep the noise down” commentary and I agree.

Here is a current situation in Apache OpenOffice where we have been regrowing 
the community and we just had an important -1 from a community member that 
prevented a bad release. We must be careful that the English on our pages is 
not tortured and overly pedantic.

Regards,
Dave


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [compress][all]Fwd: Build failed in Jenkins: Commons-Compress PullRequest Builder #56

[Dave Fisher]

Check with Infra weird errors are happening.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 19, 2017, at 8:53 PM, Stefan Bodewig  wrote:
> 
>> On 2017-06-19, Gary Gregory wrote:
>> 
>> Is it just me or have there been Jenkins failures left and right for the
>> last week or so?
> 
> That's the Jenkins job I've created for github pull requests and it
> fails whenever there are merge conflicts, for example.
> 
> Right now it looks as if the workspace was caught in an unhealthy state,
> I'll wipe it and reconfigure the job to perform clean checkouts.
> 
> Stefan
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [MATH]: Current state of project?

[Dave Fisher]

Gilles,

A suggestion from the peanut gallery. Look into the offered contributions and 
grow the community should these prove merit. Avoiding these contributions 
assures that you are the one who actually wants CM to be dormant..

If POI had not done this over the years the project would be dormant. Instead 
the active group other than Nick turns over every 3 to 5 years.

Apache requires a community. Get it, grow it.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 3, 2016, at 8:16 AM, Gilles  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2016 07:09:50 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
>>> On Aug 3, 2016, at 3:46 AM, Gilles  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 23:59:23 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
> On Aug 2, 2016, at 4:00 PM, Gilles  wrote:
> 
> 
> Most PMC members seem to wish that CM becomes dormant.
> I totally agree with you that it would be good to have _that_
> clarified.
 
 I have no idea how that is your takeaway from all the discussions.
 The point I have tried to make is that CM needs a community of
 committers, not just you.
>>> 
>>> The current situation is that there is only me (with commit
>>> privilege).
>>> Without me, all development activity would have stopped more than
>>> 8 months ago.  [That's an observational fact.]
>>> 
>>> There are volunteers for following up on my proposals but, indeed,
>>> their statements seem to count for nothing.
>>> 
>>> Isn't it awkward that people like Rob Tompkins, formerly interested
>>> in contributing to CM feels compelled to find "something else" to do
>>> here in order to get noticed, and perhaps later (or perhaps never)
>>> get the authorization to do what he really intended to in the first
>>> place?
>> 
>> There isn’t enough to do in CM to warrant becoming a Commons
>> committer? I am pretty sure that isn’t true. People don’t have to work
>> on different things, they just have to work on enough and participate
>> enough to have someone propose them as a committer. BTW - did I miss
>> your nominations for committers to help on Math?
> 
> Nominations?  Based on what?
> Everyone here has the same information as I do about the would-be


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS][VOTE] New component: Rational numbers

[Dave Fisher]

Is it possible for a committer in Commons to simply declare Lazy Consensus and 
checkin code to a new branch?

If so go ahead and see if a community forms. If a substantive conversation 
occurs.

If not then propose it and VOTE on giving Giles a branch (olive or fig) and see 
what happens?

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 22, 2016, at 4:36 PM, Gilles  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 00:58:10 +0200, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>> Gilles wrote:
>> 
 On Wed, 22 Jun 2016 11:04:48 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
 From the Peanut Gallery,
 
 All of this discussion on (too many at once) [VOTE] threads suggest
 to me that the [VOTE]s are premature.
 
 I don't understand the inclination to conduct [VOTE]s here that are
 at best straw votes and generally serve to establish that there is no
 consensus because of all the qualifications that are placed on the
 few
 [VOTE]s that are apparently cast in the blur of discussions.
 
 I think the key matter is that there is not enough discussion to
 tease out consensus and even find opportunities for lazy consensus.
 Then a [VOTE] becomes a formal ratification in those rare cases where
 such a thing is required (e.g., to back up a personnel action or take
 a resolution to the Board).
 
 I think these discussions about clustering/splitting the Commons Math
 components are very useful and interesting to observe.  The use of
 [VOTE] is worrisome and apparently useless other than for the
 attention it evokes.
>>> 
>>> There was a vote because Jörg saw it as useful in order to decide
>>> about the next step:
>>>   http://markmail.org/message/2lvirahwxerq36d2
>>> 
>>> How much longer should we rehash the same arguments from all sides?
>> 
>> 
>> The main problem is that the complete situation is unique. There has been no
>> precedence for such a case so far. I cannot think of splitting a commons
>> component in the last decade.
> 
> Comparison proves nothing.
> The ML archive is littered by warnings of mine that CM was not a component
> like the other Commons components.
> You persist by willing to treat it such although you now have seen that
> the assumption led to a nasty situation for everyone.
> 
>> If the intent is to go TLP with complete CM and the resubmit some basic
>> stuff in a view light-weight new components for Commons. For those we might
>> as well shorten this path and take the direct way.
> 
> +1 RNG
> +1 Complex numbers
> +1 Math functions
> +1 Rational numbers
> 
>> Especially since two
>> attempts to vote for TLP got us nowhere until now.
> 
> All would-be contributors voted "yes".
> A few non-contributors were mildly opposed.
> Someone mentioned that no veto should apply.
> 
> So I don't get the "got us nowhere".
> 
>>> The bottom-line of all this is that there are people (new and old
>>> contributors to CM) who wish to do things, and everything that they
>>> say _they_ will do is blocked by people who never contributed to CM
>>> and do not intend to.
>> 
>> Again. Ouch.
> 
> Well, yes!
> That's the way it is, to my dismay.
> 
> For all the discourse on diversity, and welcoming contributors,
> and letting people who do things decide, the only thing that
> was concretely accepted as "fine" is the fork of Commons Math
> outside Apache!
> 
> While people who want to build something new out of the mess left
> behind are struggling for weeks in order to be allowed to get to
> productive work.
> 
> Non-contributors have nothing to loose, the Commons PMC members
> have nothing to loose, by letting us try what we propose.
> If it does not turn into something interesting, the situation will
> be the same as it is now.
> And you can start from the exact same point in the history of the
> "Commons Math" code and try something else.
> 
> Gilles
> 
>> - Jörg
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [VFS] NOTICE required for Jackrabbit's JcrUtils? (was: [VOTE] Apache Commons VFS 2.1 rc2)

[Dave Fisher]

Just a suggestion. Ask on the jackrabbit Dev list.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 16, 2016, at 5:28 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes  wrote:
> 
> JackrabbitMain seems to be based on jackrabbit-standalone module
> 
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/blob/1.5/jackrabbit-standalone/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/standalone/Main.java
> 
> which starts in 2008:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/commit/de58b89320ed768a89035197b46f1486b35d430d
> 
>> On 16 May 2016 at 11:57, sebb  wrote:
>>> On 16 May 2016 at 10:56, Stian Soiland-Reyes  wrote:
 On 16 May 2016 at 10:10, sebb  wrote:
 
 Ignore that, I see you found the actual source file,
 so clearly it is not from the original Day contribution.
 
 I was mislead by the comments in the source which implied it came from
 various sources.
 It would be helpful to identify the actual sources in the JIRA and VFS
 once they have been established (not a blocker IMO)
 
>> I'll ask on dev@jackrabbit to be sure.
>>> 
>>> Agreed - so I've tracked it as https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VFS-611
>>> 
>>> Could you assign it to me so I can mark it as In Progress?
>> 
>> Tried, but cannot find you as an assign target.
>> 
>> BTW, there is a sibling file which also was derived from JackRabbit:
>> 
>> JackrabbitMain.java
>> 
>> I've not checked when this was added to the JR repo.
>> 
>>> --
>>> Stian Soiland-Reyes
>>> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
>>> http://orcid.org/-0001-9842-9718
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons RDF (incubating)
> http://orcid.org/-0001-9842-9718
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

When Will CSV Be Released?

[Dave Fisher]

Hi,

I am curious when CSV will be released. It is on this page [1] as a released 
component and was moved to proper 16 months ago according to svn.

We are looking to make use of it, but it would be much better as a pull from 
the Maven repos than as a jar from a nightly build.

I know there is no guarantee at the ASF about release timing, but I would like 
to know if there are plans or if there is a roadblock or other type of IP 
issue. For example, there was a recent legal discussion about US government 
files. Is that part of the delay?

Thanks and Regards,
Dave

[1] http://commons.apache.org/components.html
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: [all] NSWC and Apache license

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Sam,

Thanks! Enjoy your weekend!

Regards,
Dave

On Aug 10, 2012, at 7:59 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:

 Something that might be helpful in this discussion:
 
 http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#can-works-placed-in-the-public-domain-be-included-in-apache-products
 
 - Sam Ruby
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscr...@apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-h...@apache.org
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Fwd: [all] NSWC and Apache license

[Dave Fisher]

FWIW -

I'm forwarding the following from BF who is involved with potentially using 
some of these routines in FreeBSD.

Good luck.

Regards,
Dave

Begin forwarded message:

 From: b. f. bf1...@googlemail.com
 Date: August 9, 2012 10:47:47 AM PDT
 To: Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org
 Cc: Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net, b...@freebsd.org b...@freebsd.org
 Subject: Re: Fwd: [all] NSWC and Apache license
 Reply-To: bf1...@gmail.com
 
 On 8/9/12, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote:
 Hi Dave;
 
 The files are in a repository from b...@freebsd.org, a ports committer
 that likes to play with math solvers.
 
 I am not sure about the license and the date (1993) suggests the authors
 may be difficult to contact. It looks like Public Domain to me.
 
 Hi  bf. ... can you clarify the license of the NSWC routines?
 
 
 Although I am not a lawyer, and I cannot be certain (given the varied
 provenance of the routines, and the fact that the library was
 assembled from 1976-1993), I believe they are in the public domain,
 because:
 
 1) One of the primary authors, Morris, says in an accompanying
 technical report (which has been marked for unlimited public
 distribution):
 
 The subroutines in the library originate from a variety of sources.
 Approximately
 40% of the subroutines were developed at NSWCDD. The remaining
 subroutines are from
 government, commercial, and university research centers in the U.S.
 and abroad...
 
 Since the beginning of the development of the library, no proprietary
 or otherwise
 restricted codes have been permitted in the library. Only general
 purpose mathematical
 subroutines for use by the entire NSWCDD scientific community have
 been considered for
 the library. Restrictions on the use of any library can severely
 impair its value, both for
 theoretical purposes (where the source codes are frequently of prime
 importance), and for
 general use in applications. Since expertise is so widely scattered,
 reliable codes are so very
 difficult to obtain, and many of the libraries do not provide source
 code, the policy has been
 to make the source code of the library readily available to the
 general scientific community. ;
 
 2) works of the U.S. government are not subject to domestic
 copyright protection in the U.S.; and
 3) the library was widely distributed by NSWC-Dahlgren and JPL for a
 number of years.
 
 I don't know how this would affect Apache-licensed software.  The
 mirrored files that you saw were for a FreeBSD Port of the NSWC
 Mathlib that I have not yet committed to a public repository.  In
 addition to the original versions of NSWC Mathlib found at the
 Canadian university website, and one or two other places, a few people
 also freely distribute modified versions of some of the routines, and
 later U.S. government reports contain some additions (see, for
 example, some of the reports by Didonato and others that can be found
 at: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/ ).
 
 b.
 
 
 best regards,
 
 Pedro.
 
 
 
 
 From: Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net
 To: Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org
 Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 10:32 AM
 Subject: Fwd: [all] NSWC and Apache license
 
 Hi Pedro,
 
 Do you have any knowledge or thoughts on this licensing question?
 
 Regards,
 Dave
 
 Begin forwarded message:
 
 From: Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net
 Date: August 8, 2012 6:32:08 PM PDT
 To: legal-disc...@apache.org
 Cc: Commons Developers List dev@commons.apache.org
 Subject: Re: [all] NSWC and Apache license
 Reply-To: legal-disc...@apache.org
 delivered-to: mailing list legal-disc...@apache.org
 
 INAL, but I am a recovering Fortran programmer.
 
 I found the same repository under:
 
 http://ftp.twaren.net/FreeBSD/ports/local-distfiles/bf/nswc/Intro
 
 I think that these routines are public domain and there is no copyright
 on the manual.
 
 Really cool.
 
 Regards,
 Dave
 
 On Aug 7, 2012, at 11:36 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:
 
 Hello,
 I'm currently working on MATH-738, and am considering porting part of
 the FORTRAN NSWC Library of Mathematics Subroutines [1] (Naval
 Surface Warfare Center).
 The website states
 
  This software is made available, without cost, to the general
 scientific community. The 1993 edition is an update of the 1990
 edition.
 
 Does that mean that porting it into Commons-Math is possible
 (license-wise?). I would think it does...
 
 Thanks for your advice!
 
 Sébastien
 
 [1] http://www.ualberta.ca/CNS/RESEARCH/Software/NumericalNSWC/site.html
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscr...@apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-h...@apache.org
 
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscr...@apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-h...@apache.org
 
 
 
 
 


-
To unsubscribe

Re: [all] NSWC and Apache license

[Dave Fisher]

INAL, but I am a recovering Fortran programmer.

I found the same repository under:

http://ftp.twaren.net/FreeBSD/ports/local-distfiles/bf/nswc/Intro

I think that these routines are public domain and there is no copyright on the 
manual. 

Really cool.

Regards,
Dave

On Aug 7, 2012, at 11:36 PM, Sébastien Brisard wrote:

 Hello,
 I'm currently working on MATH-738, and am considering porting part of
 the FORTRAN NSWC Library of Mathematics Subroutines [1] (Naval
 Surface Warfare Center).
 The website states
 
This software is made available, without cost, to the general
 scientific community. The 1993 edition is an update of the 1990
 edition.
 
 Does that mean that porting it into Commons-Math is possible
 (license-wise?). I would think it does...
 
 Thanks for your advice!
 
 Sébastien
 
 [1] http://www.ualberta.ca/CNS/RESEARCH/Software/NumericalNSWC/site.html
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscr...@apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-h...@apache.org
 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org