Re: Podling Report - Seeking feedback

[Jignesh Patel]

Thanks Harshad for taking the lead on this!

I have also uploaded this on: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/March2017. We 
can make changes to the wiki if there is feedback from the mentors. Let us know.

Cheers,
Jignesh 

On 3/2/17, 5:36 PM, "Harshad Deshmukh"  wrote:

Hello mentors,

May I request you to review the following podling report? Thanks for 
your time.

*   Your project name
Apache (incubating) Quickstep

*   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of
 the project or necessarily of its field
Apache Quickstep is high-performance database engine designed to exploit 
the full potential
of hardware that is packed in modern computing boxes (servers and laptops).
The initial version targets single-node in-memory environments.

*   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
 towards graduation.
1) Building a Quickstep community
2) More adoption of the Quickstep technology
3) Making the technology easier to understand and use

*   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be
 aware of
None

*   How has the community developed since the last report

Members of the community have become more aware about the release process.

The details about the release process are well documented so that future 
releases will be smooth and more frequent.

*   How has the project developed since the last report.

We will have our first release this month. Since the last report,

1) We have made several changes to the code base.
Some highlights are: Cleaning up the third party library code as per the 
Apache hygiene, improve the code performance by adding several novel 
features.

2) Preparation for release -
Created scripts and step by step procedural documentation for how to 
make a Quickstep release.

Scripts have been added to the main repo while documentation is on 
confluence.

We went through several release candidates.

During this period, we identified some usability issues on our supported 
platforms and fixed them.

*   How does the podling rate their own maturity.

Preparation for the first release is under way and the release is 
expected to happen in this month.

-- 

Thanks,
Harshad

[GitHub] incubator-quickstep issue #189: patches for missed linenoise changes

[zuyu]

Github user zuyu commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-quickstep/pull/189
  
Never mind. It works after resetting the third party and recompiling.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Podling Report - Seeking feedback

[Harshad Deshmukh]

Hello mentors,

May I request you to review the following podling report? Thanks for 
your time.


*   Your project name
Apache (incubating) Quickstep

*   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of
the project or necessarily of its field
Apache Quickstep is high-performance database engine designed to exploit 
the full potential

of hardware that is packed in modern computing boxes (servers and laptops).
The initial version targets single-node in-memory environments.

*   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
towards graduation.
1) Building a Quickstep community
2) More adoption of the Quickstep technology
3) Making the technology easier to understand and use

*   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be
aware of
None

*   How has the community developed since the last report

Members of the community have become more aware about the release process.

The details about the release process are well documented so that future 
releases will be smooth and more frequent.


*   How has the project developed since the last report.

We will have our first release this month. Since the last report,

1) We have made several changes to the code base.
Some highlights are: Cleaning up the third party library code as per the 
Apache hygiene, improve the code performance by adding several novel 
features.


2) Preparation for release -
Created scripts and step by step procedural documentation for how to 
make a Quickstep release.


Scripts have been added to the main repo while documentation is on 
confluence.


We went through several release candidates.

During this period, we identified some usability issues on our supported 
platforms and fixed them.


*   How does the podling rate their own maturity.

Preparation for the first release is under way and the release is 
expected to happen in this month.


--

Thanks,
Harshad

Re: We really need to get going with the podling report

[Julian Hyde]

Ah, I didn’t notice the artifacts because they weren’t listed in the email. The 
vote thread needs to list the URLs of the artifacts and include (in the body of 
the email) the checksums. (Why? Because people voting on the release must 
download those artifacts and check them against the checksums. And the 
checksums need to be in the email thread so that no one can later deny that 
they voted on these exact artifacts.)

As an example, here’s a fragment from a recent Calcite vote:

(begin)

The commit to be voted upon:
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite/commit/f8ba670de4e283d1532f288de53fdb67fa4dea67

Its hash is f8ba670de4e283d1532f288de53fdb67fa4dea67.

The artifacts to be voted on are located here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/calcite/apache-calcite-1.11.0-rc0

The hashes of the artifacts are as follows:
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.tar.gz:MD5 = 88 FF 46 FC 13 A6 AE 98  BB 53 7D 8C
  24 73 D7 12
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.tar.gz:   SHA1 = 7CDE F906 0665 44F4 6CCA  4021 D515
  935A 6243 A869
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.tar.gz: RMD160 = 0783 C9BD 5397 B045 45AB  F750 7541
  611F A78A D31C
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.tar.gz: SHA224 = 024B9857 29EA0FCD 0315E10C C75DD1F1
  A50A1611 93ED3577 C91F5E3A
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.tar.gz: SHA256 = 10976E10 3C420300 AFC7AD83 810755CA
  6DE31081 DDFB3325 7721A204 ACDA0D26
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.tar.gz: SHA384 = 178FC2CC 9064A51B 30AE7454 BA7A2507
  7A555E05 CB758FE0 642C4877 622BE539
  DAF7BCC2 CB9D2244 335FF0C7 5513DA7B
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.tar.gz: SHA512 = E539EE3C 39DF3358 DABC4216 861C88D3
  4F7030F3 34C7D759 21CC47B9 8D4E5B09
  124AEA8D F5AC3B3D 29BFAADB A027102C
  795F0DAF 778AFAC2 93F1D902 E2D62B2A
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.zip:MD5 = F0 FD C7 7F A0 32 E4 95  E3 E5 3D 47 B7
   B2 C4 8D
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.zip:   SHA1 = 1347 67F0 1D70 4AB9 FBB2  7EEF 61F1 1A8A
   86E9 E26B
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.zip: RMD160 = EE4D 5C2F 4396 2758 9DF0  C5CA 961A 0631
   64A8 E060
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.zip: SHA224 = 28A18665 3695592E A15C2CF1 0A684A15
   D5A53243 CB712249 FDBEBF65
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.zip: SHA256 = 7AEF77DE EF34612D 3AA6BF72 F02163A2
   D8808658 CAB8980B B35D454D AC3A5BB7
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.zip: SHA384 = E6EDFAFD 8E2C55B9 9F19B75F F276A2AF
   82E4DC6B 8788D143 BAB42CEC D029ACD1
   E315C857 9645DF30 E41DEA8D 8A2767AA
apache-calcite-1.11.0-src.zip: SHA512 = F2BEEBB4 649DAA40 B73EBE51 D22242D8
   6250B27E 94F4C100 5915E6D5 8A2EF1A5
   1BFBB37E C1670D68 C0427FB4 85785CE4
   504BC1A5 DFEFE2EE 288323C7 DCD5DEF4

Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/jhyde.asc

Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Calcite 1.11.0.

(end)

I recommend that Quickstep adopt similar boilerplate, because a release vote is 
actually a rather formal protocol. The full thread is here:  
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/calcite-dev/201701.mbox/%3C5C408E13-C276-4902-A0FC-802736574168%40apache.org%3E
 


Julian



> On Mar 2, 2017, at 1:09 PM, Marc Spehlmann  wrote:
> 
> We have been publishing to the dev/ svn
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/quickstep/0.1.0/RC5/
> 
> Maybe we missed something. Is there a better way to announce this?
> 
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Julian Hyde  wrote:
> 
>> I haven’t been voting on the RCs because I haven’t yet seen a “release
>> candidate” — a signed artifact (tarball) and its checksums. It seems that
>> while the code is in good shape, release packaging needs some work. I’ll
>> weigh in on the latest RC vote thread.
>> 
>> Julian
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 2, 2017, at 12:33 PM, Harshad Deshmukh 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Julian,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your inputs. I will modify the report accordingly and send it
>> out for review.
>>> 
>>> Just an update on the release progress - Marc floated a vote for RC5
>> (yesterday evening CST) on the dev list, which has gotten more than 3 +1s
>> so far. It appears that this release candidate (RC5) should be the final
>> one, therefore I thought this week 

Re: We really need to get going with the podling report

[Marc Spehlmann]

We have been publishing to the dev/ svn

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/quickstep/0.1.0/RC5/

Maybe we missed something. Is there a better way to announce this?

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Julian Hyde  wrote:

> I haven’t been voting on the RCs because I haven’t yet seen a “release
> candidate” — a signed artifact (tarball) and its checksums. It seems that
> while the code is in good shape, release packaging needs some work. I’ll
> weigh in on the latest RC vote thread.
>
> Julian
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 2017, at 12:33 PM, Harshad Deshmukh 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Julian,
> >
> > Thanks for your inputs. I will modify the report accordingly and send it
> out for review.
> >
> > Just an update on the release progress - Marc floated a vote for RC5
> (yesterday evening CST) on the dev list, which has gotten more than 3 +1s
> so far. It appears that this release candidate (RC5) should be the final
> one, therefore I thought this week should be a realistic target for the
> release. Marc should have an idea about the next steps, so if I
> misunderstood something w.r.t the release estimates, please let me know.
> >
> >
> > On 03/02/2017 02:12 PM, Marc Spehlmann wrote:
> >> Hi Julian,
> >>
> >> I agree that 'this week' is optimistic. Though, we have been going
> through
> >> the voting process on @dev, it's likely that the current RC will not
> pass,
> >> meaning that we'll need to restart the whole process, as you said.
> >>
> >> Considering, 'this month' is probably a more realistic wording.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Julian Hyde  wrote:
> >>
> >>> In answer to the “How does the podling rate their maturity?”. The
> >>> incubator report used to have categories "Ready to Graduate", “Some
> >>> Community Growth", "No Release" and "Still Getting Started.” Out of
> these,
> >>> I think “No release” fits best. You can add that the first release is
> well
> >>> under way.
> >>>
> >>> "We will have our first release this week” is a bit optimistic.
> Remember
> >>> you need to create a release candidate, pass a vote on the Quickstep
> list
> >>> (which takes 3 working days), repeat if there is a problem with the
> RC, and
> >>> then pass a vote on the incubator list (which takes 3 working days).
> Again,
> >>> the incubator vote might fail, and in fact probably will the first or
> >>> second time.
> >>>
> >>> A true statement is “we are almost ready to start a vote on our first
> >>> release candidate”.
> >>>
> >>> Julian
> >>>
> >>>
>  On Mar 2, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Harshad Deshmukh 
> >>> wrote:
>  Hi Roman,
> 
>  Apologies for the delay. I am not sure how to address two of these
> >>> questions, hence left them blank. Any inputs in that regard should be
> >>> helpful. Can you please review the following report?
>  *   Your project name
>  Apache (incubating) Quickstep
> 
>  *   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of
> the project or necessarily of its field
>  Apache Quickstep is high-performance database engine designed to
> exploit
> >>> the full potential
>  of hardware that is packed in modern computing boxes (servers and
> >>> laptops).
>  The initial version targets single-node in-memory environments.
> 
>  *   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
> towards graduation.
>  1) Building a Quickstep community
>  2) More adoption of the Quickstep technology
>  3) Making the technology easier to understand and use
> 
>  *   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to
> be
> aware of
>  None
> 
>  *   How has the community developed since the last report
> 
>  *   How has the project developed since the last report.
> 
>  We will have our first release this week. Since the last report,
> 
>  1) We have made several changes to the code base.
>  Some highlights are: Cleaning up the third party library code as per
> the
> >>> Apache hygiene, improve the code performance by adding several novel
> >>> features.
>  2) Preparation for release -
>  Created scripts and step by step procedural documentation for how to
> >>> make a Quickstep release. Scripts have been added to the main repo
> while
> >>> documentation is on confluence.
>  We went through several release candidates. During this period, we
> >>> identified some usability issues on our supported platforms and fixed
> them.
> >>> Quickstep is now on schedule for a release later this week.
>  *   How does the podling rate their own maturity.
> 
> 
>  On 02/28/2017 10:23 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
>  --
>  Thanks,
>  Harshad
> 
> >>>
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Harshad
> >
>
>

Re: We really need to get going with the podling report

[Julian Hyde]

I haven’t been voting on the RCs because I haven’t yet seen a “release 
candidate” — a signed artifact (tarball) and its checksums. It seems that while 
the code is in good shape, release packaging needs some work. I’ll weigh in on 
the latest RC vote thread.

Julian


> On Mar 2, 2017, at 12:33 PM, Harshad Deshmukh  wrote:
> 
> Hi Julian,
> 
> Thanks for your inputs. I will modify the report accordingly and send it out 
> for review.
> 
> Just an update on the release progress - Marc floated a vote for RC5 
> (yesterday evening CST) on the dev list, which has gotten more than 3 +1s so 
> far. It appears that this release candidate (RC5) should be the final one, 
> therefore I thought this week should be a realistic target for the release. 
> Marc should have an idea about the next steps, so if I misunderstood 
> something w.r.t the release estimates, please let me know.
> 
> 
> On 03/02/2017 02:12 PM, Marc Spehlmann wrote:
>> Hi Julian,
>> 
>> I agree that 'this week' is optimistic. Though, we have been going through
>> the voting process on @dev, it's likely that the current RC will not pass,
>> meaning that we'll need to restart the whole process, as you said.
>> 
>> Considering, 'this month' is probably a more realistic wording.
>> 
>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Julian Hyde  wrote:
>> 
>>> In answer to the “How does the podling rate their maturity?”. The
>>> incubator report used to have categories "Ready to Graduate", “Some
>>> Community Growth", "No Release" and "Still Getting Started.” Out of these,
>>> I think “No release” fits best. You can add that the first release is well
>>> under way.
>>> 
>>> "We will have our first release this week” is a bit optimistic. Remember
>>> you need to create a release candidate, pass a vote on the Quickstep list
>>> (which takes 3 working days), repeat if there is a problem with the RC, and
>>> then pass a vote on the incubator list (which takes 3 working days). Again,
>>> the incubator vote might fail, and in fact probably will the first or
>>> second time.
>>> 
>>> A true statement is “we are almost ready to start a vote on our first
>>> release candidate”.
>>> 
>>> Julian
>>> 
>>> 
 On Mar 2, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Harshad Deshmukh 
>>> wrote:
 Hi Roman,
 
 Apologies for the delay. I am not sure how to address two of these
>>> questions, hence left them blank. Any inputs in that regard should be
>>> helpful. Can you please review the following report?
 *   Your project name
 Apache (incubating) Quickstep
 
 *   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of
the project or necessarily of its field
 Apache Quickstep is high-performance database engine designed to exploit
>>> the full potential
 of hardware that is packed in modern computing boxes (servers and
>>> laptops).
 The initial version targets single-node in-memory environments.
 
 *   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
towards graduation.
 1) Building a Quickstep community
 2) More adoption of the Quickstep technology
 3) Making the technology easier to understand and use
 
 *   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be
aware of
 None
 
 *   How has the community developed since the last report
 
 *   How has the project developed since the last report.
 
 We will have our first release this week. Since the last report,
 
 1) We have made several changes to the code base.
 Some highlights are: Cleaning up the third party library code as per the
>>> Apache hygiene, improve the code performance by adding several novel
>>> features.
 2) Preparation for release -
 Created scripts and step by step procedural documentation for how to
>>> make a Quickstep release. Scripts have been added to the main repo while
>>> documentation is on confluence.
 We went through several release candidates. During this period, we
>>> identified some usability issues on our supported platforms and fixed them.
>>> Quickstep is now on schedule for a release later this week.
 *   How does the podling rate their own maturity.
 
 
 On 02/28/2017 10:23 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
 --
 Thanks,
 Harshad
 
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> Harshad
> 

Re: We really need to get going with the podling report

[Harshad Deshmukh]

Hi Julian,

Thanks for your inputs. I will modify the report accordingly and send it 
out for review.


Just an update on the release progress - Marc floated a vote for RC5 
(yesterday evening CST) on the dev list, which has gotten more than 3 
+1s so far. It appears that this release candidate (RC5) should be the 
final one, therefore I thought this week should be a realistic target 
for the release. Marc should have an idea about the next steps, so if I 
misunderstood something w.r.t the release estimates, please let me know.



On 03/02/2017 02:12 PM, Marc Spehlmann wrote:

Hi Julian,

I agree that 'this week' is optimistic. Though, we have been going through
the voting process on @dev, it's likely that the current RC will not pass,
meaning that we'll need to restart the whole process, as you said.

Considering, 'this month' is probably a more realistic wording.

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Julian Hyde  wrote:


In answer to the “How does the podling rate their maturity?”. The
incubator report used to have categories "Ready to Graduate", “Some
Community Growth", "No Release" and "Still Getting Started.” Out of these,
I think “No release” fits best. You can add that the first release is well
under way.

"We will have our first release this week” is a bit optimistic. Remember
you need to create a release candidate, pass a vote on the Quickstep list
(which takes 3 working days), repeat if there is a problem with the RC, and
then pass a vote on the incubator list (which takes 3 working days). Again,
the incubator vote might fail, and in fact probably will the first or
second time.

A true statement is “we are almost ready to start a vote on our first
release candidate”.

Julian



On Mar 2, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Harshad Deshmukh 

wrote:

Hi Roman,

Apologies for the delay. I am not sure how to address two of these

questions, hence left them blank. Any inputs in that regard should be
helpful. Can you please review the following report?

*   Your project name
Apache (incubating) Quickstep

*   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of
the project or necessarily of its field
Apache Quickstep is high-performance database engine designed to exploit

the full potential

of hardware that is packed in modern computing boxes (servers and

laptops).

The initial version targets single-node in-memory environments.

*   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
towards graduation.
1) Building a Quickstep community
2) More adoption of the Quickstep technology
3) Making the technology easier to understand and use

*   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be
aware of
None

*   How has the community developed since the last report

*   How has the project developed since the last report.

We will have our first release this week. Since the last report,

1) We have made several changes to the code base.
Some highlights are: Cleaning up the third party library code as per the

Apache hygiene, improve the code performance by adding several novel
features.

2) Preparation for release -
Created scripts and step by step procedural documentation for how to

make a Quickstep release. Scripts have been added to the main repo while
documentation is on confluence.

We went through several release candidates. During this period, we

identified some usability issues on our supported platforms and fixed them.
Quickstep is now on schedule for a release later this week.

*   How does the podling rate their own maturity.


On 02/28/2017 10:23 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:

Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?

--
Thanks,
Harshad





--
Thanks,
Harshad

Re: [VOTE] incubator-quickstep-0.1.0RC5

[Harshad Deshmukh]

Hi Marc,

+1 from me. Here's a brief summary of what I tested -

1. Download the source code - OK

2. Download the third party libraries (dependencies) - OK

3. cmake build - OK

4. Source code build - OK

5. Running tests - OK.


On 03/02/2017 11:48 AM, Jignesh Patel wrote:

+1 from me!

On 3/1/17, 10:48 PM, "Jianqiao"  wrote:

 +1. I'm good with the release.
 
 Best,

 Jianqiao
 
 2017-03-01 17:21 GMT-06:00 HAKAN MEMISOGLU :
 
 > Hi Marc,

 >
 > +1 from me. It works with Docker.
 >
 > However I also get an error when I try to build it with Mac.
 > The linker cannot find some symbols that protoc uses.
 >
 > > On Mar 1, 2017, at 4:30 PM, Marc Spehlmann 
 > wrote:
 > >
 > > Jianqiao and I worked today to merge some PRs that we thought should go
 > in
 > > the first release. Accordingly we have created another candidate.
 > >
 > > As per Apache, *we require 3 +1 votes* from project members to make 
this
 > an
 > > official release.
 > >
 > > Before voting, please test the release (build, run ctest). For a guide 
on
 > > how to test, GOTO release/README.md
 > >
 > > This vote will remain open for 72 hours or until we find issues that we
 > can
 > > quickly correct and create another candidate.
 > >
 > > more details on
 > >
 > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/QUICKSTEP/How+To+Release
 > >
 > > --Marc
 >
 >
 





--
Thanks,
Harshad

Re: We really need to get going with the podling report

[Marc Spehlmann]

Hi Julian,

I agree that 'this week' is optimistic. Though, we have been going through
the voting process on @dev, it's likely that the current RC will not pass,
meaning that we'll need to restart the whole process, as you said.

Considering, 'this month' is probably a more realistic wording.

On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:08 PM, Julian Hyde  wrote:

> In answer to the “How does the podling rate their maturity?”. The
> incubator report used to have categories "Ready to Graduate", “Some
> Community Growth", "No Release" and "Still Getting Started.” Out of these,
> I think “No release” fits best. You can add that the first release is well
> under way.
>
> "We will have our first release this week” is a bit optimistic. Remember
> you need to create a release candidate, pass a vote on the Quickstep list
> (which takes 3 working days), repeat if there is a problem with the RC, and
> then pass a vote on the incubator list (which takes 3 working days). Again,
> the incubator vote might fail, and in fact probably will the first or
> second time.
>
> A true statement is “we are almost ready to start a vote on our first
> release candidate”.
>
> Julian
>
>
> > On Mar 2, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Harshad Deshmukh 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Roman,
> >
> > Apologies for the delay. I am not sure how to address two of these
> questions, hence left them blank. Any inputs in that regard should be
> helpful. Can you please review the following report?
> >
> > *   Your project name
> > Apache (incubating) Quickstep
> >
> > *   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of
> >the project or necessarily of its field
> > Apache Quickstep is high-performance database engine designed to exploit
> the full potential
> > of hardware that is packed in modern computing boxes (servers and
> laptops).
> > The initial version targets single-node in-memory environments.
> >
> > *   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
> >towards graduation.
> > 1) Building a Quickstep community
> > 2) More adoption of the Quickstep technology
> > 3) Making the technology easier to understand and use
> >
> > *   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be
> >aware of
> > None
> >
> > *   How has the community developed since the last report
> >
> > *   How has the project developed since the last report.
> >
> > We will have our first release this week. Since the last report,
> >
> > 1) We have made several changes to the code base.
> > Some highlights are: Cleaning up the third party library code as per the
> Apache hygiene, improve the code performance by adding several novel
> features.
> >
> > 2) Preparation for release -
> > Created scripts and step by step procedural documentation for how to
> make a Quickstep release. Scripts have been added to the main repo while
> documentation is on confluence.
> > We went through several release candidates. During this period, we
> identified some usability issues on our supported platforms and fixed them.
> Quickstep is now on schedule for a release later this week.
> >
> > *   How does the podling rate their own maturity.
> >
> >
> > On 02/28/2017 10:23 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> >> Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> > Harshad
> >
>
>

Re: We really need to get going with the podling report

[Julian Hyde]

In answer to the “How does the podling rate their maturity?”. The incubator 
report used to have categories "Ready to Graduate", “Some Community Growth", 
"No Release" and "Still Getting Started.” Out of these, I think “No release” 
fits best. You can add that the first release is well under way.

"We will have our first release this week” is a bit optimistic. Remember you 
need to create a release candidate, pass a vote on the Quickstep list (which 
takes 3 working days), repeat if there is a problem with the RC, and then pass 
a vote on the incubator list (which takes 3 working days). Again, the incubator 
vote might fail, and in fact probably will the first or second time.

A true statement is “we are almost ready to start a vote on our first release 
candidate”.

Julian


> On Mar 2, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Harshad Deshmukh  wrote:
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 
> Apologies for the delay. I am not sure how to address two of these questions, 
> hence left them blank. Any inputs in that regard should be helpful. Can you 
> please review the following report?
> 
> *   Your project name
> Apache (incubating) Quickstep
> 
> *   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of
>the project or necessarily of its field
> Apache Quickstep is high-performance database engine designed to exploit the 
> full potential
> of hardware that is packed in modern computing boxes (servers and laptops).
> The initial version targets single-node in-memory environments.
> 
> *   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
>towards graduation.
> 1) Building a Quickstep community
> 2) More adoption of the Quickstep technology
> 3) Making the technology easier to understand and use
> 
> *   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be
>aware of
> None
> 
> *   How has the community developed since the last report
> 
> *   How has the project developed since the last report.
> 
> We will have our first release this week. Since the last report,
> 
> 1) We have made several changes to the code base.
> Some highlights are: Cleaning up the third party library code as per the 
> Apache hygiene, improve the code performance by adding several novel features.
> 
> 2) Preparation for release -
> Created scripts and step by step procedural documentation for how to make a 
> Quickstep release. Scripts have been added to the main repo while 
> documentation is on confluence.
> We went through several release candidates. During this period, we identified 
> some usability issues on our supported platforms and fixed them. Quickstep is 
> now on schedule for a release later this week.
> 
> *   How does the podling rate their own maturity.
> 
> 
> On 02/28/2017 10:23 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>> Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> Harshad
> 

Re: We really need to get going with the podling report

[Harshad Deshmukh]

Hi Roman,

Apologies for the delay. I am not sure how to address two of these 
questions, hence left them blank. Any inputs in that regard should be 
helpful. Can you please review the following report?


*   Your project name
Apache (incubating) Quickstep

*   A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of
the project or necessarily of its field
Apache Quickstep is high-performance database engine designed to exploit the 
full potential
of hardware that is packed in modern computing boxes (servers and laptops).
The initial version targets single-node in-memory environments.

*   A list of the three most important issues to address in the move
towards graduation.
1) Building a Quickstep community
2) More adoption of the Quickstep technology
3) Making the technology easier to understand and use

*   Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be
aware of
None

*   How has the community developed since the last report

*   How has the project developed since the last report.

We will have our first release this week. Since the last report,

1) We have made several changes to the code base.
Some highlights are: Cleaning up the third party library code as per the Apache 
hygiene, improve the code performance by adding several novel features.

2) Preparation for release -
Created scripts and step by step procedural documentation for how to make a 
Quickstep release. Scripts have been added to the main repo while documentation 
is on confluence.
We went through several release candidates. During this period, we identified 
some usability issues on our supported platforms and fixed them. Quickstep is 
now on schedule for a release later this week.

*   How does the podling rate their own maturity.


On 02/28/2017 10:23 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:

Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?


--
Thanks,
Harshad

Re: [VOTE] incubator-quickstep-0.1.0RC5

[Jignesh Patel]

+1 from me!

On 3/1/17, 10:48 PM, "Jianqiao"  wrote:

+1. I'm good with the release.

Best,
Jianqiao

2017-03-01 17:21 GMT-06:00 HAKAN MEMISOGLU :

> Hi Marc,
>
> +1 from me. It works with Docker.
>
> However I also get an error when I try to build it with Mac.
> The linker cannot find some symbols that protoc uses.
>
> > On Mar 1, 2017, at 4:30 PM, Marc Spehlmann 
> wrote:
> >
> > Jianqiao and I worked today to merge some PRs that we thought should go
> in
> > the first release. Accordingly we have created another candidate.
> >
> > As per Apache, *we require 3 +1 votes* from project members to make this
> an
> > official release.
> >
> > Before voting, please test the release (build, run ctest). For a guide 
on
> > how to test, GOTO release/README.md
> >
> > This vote will remain open for 72 hours or until we find issues that we
> can
> > quickly correct and create another candidate.
> >
> > more details on
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/QUICKSTEP/How+To+Release
> >
> > --Marc
>
>