[ANN] Apache NMaven 0.15-incubating Released
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 The Apache NMaven team is pleased to announce the release of NMaven 0.15-incubating. NMaven provides Maven 2.x plugins to support building of .NET applications. http://incubator.apache.org/nmaven/0.15/ Features for this release include: 1) Compiling C# projects (2.0 framework) 2) Strong Naming 3) Generation of assembly info based on pom metadata 4) Support for Microsoft and Novell/Mono platforms - -- The Apache NMaven Team -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkfoXGkACgkQXJIdCxe4X/QMbQCgh5KSiJfDKxoMd7qTDamIwy8R hvgAoId9K4gy+bx2bMMUGSJatE5JpCnL =Fap3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
I see no reason why we shouldn't graduate. With Rupert, possibly so ... is he really the only one independent from RH and JPMC *today*? Are there any others? Noel, we had the following folks who made large contributions. Colin Crist (Hermes integration / use cases) Tomas Restrepo (.NET) Kevin Smith (TLS) Bupendra (Mgt console) Tomas who was voted in as a committer has mentioned his interest in helping with the .NET client again. We have Josk Krammer and Steve Hutson who is engaging the list with the intetion of providing some good contributions (which I am sure will result in comittership, given the work they have proposed). These folks seems to have customers interested in the features they are trying to implement, so I expect a more close relationship from them with Qpid. Regards, Rajith - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Regards, Rajith Attapattu Red Hat blog: http://rajith.2rlabs.com/
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On 3/25/08, Rajith Attapattu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: we had the following folks who made large contributions. Colin Crist (Hermes integration / use cases) Tomas Restrepo (.NET) Kevin Smith (TLS) Bupendra (Mgt console) Tomas who was voted in as a committer has mentioned his interest in helping with the .NET client again. We have Josk Krammer and Steve Hutson who is engaging the list with the intetion of providing some good contributions (which I am sure will result in comittership, given the work they have proposed). These folks seems to have customers interested in the features they are trying to implement, so I expect a more close relationship from them with Qpid. It is not a question of who is active on the list, but how the PMC/committership looks like at graduation. All the names you supplied are *not* on the PMC, and therefore don't count for the diversity requirement. The issue is not if there are enough users that contribute something, but whether the QPid community (PPMC) is capable of growing to a diverse community, i.e. a diverse PMC. Martijn -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.2 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.2 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not a question of who is active on the list, but how the PMC/committership looks like at graduation. All the names you supplied are *not* on the PMC, and therefore don't count for the diversity requirement. I was under the impression that it was the committership that was looked at, not the PPMC. Am I misreading The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project) from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html ? - Aidan -- aim/y!:aidans42 g:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aidan.skinner.me.uk/ We belong to nobody and nobody belongs to us. We don't even belong to each other. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
The project means the people that can vote and make decisions. Committers who are not PMC members can not as their vote is not binding. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Aidan Skinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not a question of who is active on the list, but how the PMC/committership looks like at graduation. All the names you supplied are *not* on the PMC, and therefore don't count for the diversity requirement. I was under the impression that it was the committership that was looked at, not the PPMC. Am I misreading The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project) from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html ? - Aidan -- aim/y!:aidans42 g:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aidan.skinner.me.uk/ We belong to nobody and nobody belongs to us. We don't even belong to each other. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
Guillaume That is a little misleading. Committers can and do have binding votes. However, there are some things such as releases that must have PMC binding votes. Paul On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The project means the people that can vote and make decisions. Committers who are not PMC members can not as their vote is not binding. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Aidan Skinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not a question of who is active on the list, but how the PMC/committership looks like at graduation. All the names you supplied are *not* on the PMC, and therefore don't count for the diversity requirement. I was under the impression that it was the committership that was looked at, not the PPMC. Am I misreading The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project) from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html ? - Aidan -- aim/y!:aidans42 g:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aidan.skinner.me.uk/ We belong to nobody and nobody belongs to us. We don't even belong to each other. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ -- Paul Fremantle Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2 Apache Synapse PMC Chair OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Oxygenating the Web Service Platform, www.wso2.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On 3/25/08, Aidan Skinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was under the impression that it was the committership that was looked at, not the PPMC. Am I misreading The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project) from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html ? The only folks that have a binding vote and therefore an absolute say in the future and direction of the project are the PMC members. therefore it is absolutely necessary that the PMC is diverse. A non-diverse PMC can block entry to the project, or decide whether or not to implement a feature, blocking the interests of other parties in the wider community. Martijn -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.2 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.2 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
No, committers *don't* have binding votes: Binding Votes 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. That's the general rule. In actual fact, things tend to be a little looser, and procedural votes from developers and committers are sometimes considered binding if the voter has acquired enough merit and respect in the community. Only votes by PMC members are considered binding on code-modification issues, however. Martijn On 3/25/08, Paul Fremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Guillaume That is a little misleading. Committers can and do have binding votes. However, there are some things such as releases that must have PMC binding votes. Paul On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The project means the people that can vote and make decisions. Committers who are not PMC members can not as their vote is not binding. On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Aidan Skinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:06 PM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is not a question of who is active on the list, but how the PMC/committership looks like at graduation. All the names you supplied are *not* on the PMC, and therefore don't count for the diversity requirement. I was under the impression that it was the committership that was looked at, not the PPMC. Am I misreading The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project) from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html ? - Aidan -- aim/y!:aidans42 g:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aidan.skinner.me.uk/ We belong to nobody and nobody belongs to us. We don't even belong to each other. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ -- Paul Fremantle Co-Founder and VP of Technical Sales, WSO2 Apache Synapse PMC Chair OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair blog: http://pzf.fremantle.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Oxygenating the Web Service Platform, www.wso2.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst Apache Wicket 1.3.2 is released Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.2 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 8:34 AM, Rupert Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't forget about me. I am a currently active Qpid committer and not an employee of either RedHat or JPMC. http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg02323.html I've done the independent contractor thing for a long time myself... doesn't make you independent IMO, and it should have been disclosed. -Yonik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On Monday 24 March 2008, Carl Trieloff wrote: Huh? The graduation guide says there are at least 3 legally independent committers and I don't see that with Qpid. Dan, I think it has been proved that there are at least 3 legally independent committers - please can you revise your statement and/or vote. I honestly still have doubts. The only one that has come out as being POSSIBLY independent is Rupert, but he IS listed as representing JPMC on the amqp-0.10 spec. But in any case, even if he is, that's very bare minimum. When CXF was at very bare minimum, we were asked to keep up the good work. When Tuscany was at the very bare minumum, they were asked to keep working. Why should Qpid be held to a lower standard than the other projects? Do I think Qpid is on the right track? Yes. Do I think Qpid has a good plan in place to address the diversity? Yes Do I think Qpid can implement that plan? Certainly Does any of that have any impact on a graduation vote today? Nope Put it this way, lets look at a different requirement: legal vetting of code. Would we allow a podling to graduate with just a plan to address the legal vetting of code? I don't think so. Why should a plan to address diversity be any different? Qpid has accepted code from a bunch of diverse people. That's true. There are diverse people contributing patches and ideas and such. That's also true (and very good to see). None of that has any impact on the gradation vote either. You can harp on it all you want, but it's completely irrelevant until the project has gone through and mentored them into becoming full project members. IMO, Qpid should take the next couple months and really concentrate on executing the plan, mentor the potential commiters, and grow the community. Come back in a couple months with an expanded community and I'm sure the vote would go through without a hitch. What harm is there in doing that? I think you would exit the incubator on a much better position without and questions and I think the incubator folks would feel better about it. I think as a project/community, it would feel better to exit on good terms with everyone rather than people having lingering doubts and a barely squeaked by type vote. I guess the question I have is: what's the rush? Why push something through when there are serious concerns being raised? Being in the incubator doesn't prevent you from doing anything so I cannot really see any harm in that. -- J. Daniel Kulp Principal Engineer, IONA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.dankulp.com/blog - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
BTW: found this description at: http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html On 3/25/08, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, committers *don't* have binding votes: Binding Votes 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. That's the general rule. In actual fact, things tend to be a little looser, and procedural votes from developers and committers are sometimes considered binding if the voter has acquired enough merit and respect in the community. Only votes by PMC members are considered binding on code-modification issues, however. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 6:23 PM, Carl Trieloff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Over the course of the project we have received large contributions from at least 3+ legally independents. They include Rupert Smith (.NET), Colin Crist (Hermes integration / use cases), Tomas Restrepo (.NET). Rupert is the only committer, and he looks like he may have a JPMC affiliation to me. Let's drop the legally qualifier from independent... this isn't the IRS :-) I'm more concerned about the misleading statements on committer diversity than I am about the actual diversity itself. -Yonik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On 25/03/2008, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rupert is the only committer, and he looks like he may have a JPMC affiliation to me. Let's drop the legally qualifier from independent... this isn't the IRS :-) I'm more concerned about the misleading statements on committer diversity than I am about the actual diversity itself. For the record, Rupert is not employed either directly or indirectly by JPMC. In the past he has provided consultancy to JPMC on a variety of projects. I do not believe that there has been any attempt to mislead. RG - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On 25/03/2008, Robert Greig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's drop the legally qualifier from independent... this isn't the IRS :-) In that case I would claim that I am also independent. Although I work for JPMC I am not paid to work on the Qpid project and all my contributions for the last 14 months have been in my own time. As anyone can see from my public LinkedIn profile, I am an architect for the cash equities business. RG - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/25/08, Aidan Skinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was under the impression that it was the committership that was looked at, not the PPMC. Am I misreading The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent committers and there is no single company or entity that is vital to the success of the project) from http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html ? The only folks that have a binding vote and therefore an absolute say in the future and direction of the project are the PMC members. therefore it is absolutely necessary that the PMC is diverse. A non-diverse PMC can block entry to the project, or decide whether or not to implement a feature, blocking the interests of other parties in the wider community. That makes total sense, thanks for clarifying. It might be an idea to update the documentation since it's not clear that you need a PPMC with 3 independent groups on it. - Aidan -- aim/y!:aidans42 g:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://aidan.skinner.me.uk/ We belong to nobody and nobody belongs to us. We don't even belong to each other. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
I don't mean to be secretive so I shall clarify things for you. I have provided consultancy to JPMC and this did relate to Qpid, particularly helping some of their teams to get set up with it. However, I have never been covered by a corporate CLA but signed it as an individual contributor. This was because I was not ever an employee of JPMC but provided consultancy through another company. Our contract stated something along the lines of JPMC specify what it is that they need, but is up to the contractor to decide how, where, when this is fulfilled (in order to make it clear that I was not an employee). In other words, I chose of my own independent free will to recomend Qpid as a solution for them, and contributed to it as an independant entity to further our mutual aims, rather than being employed specifically to work on it. I have finished consulting for JPMC but am still a committer to the project. I have an active interest in other customers who could benefit from free and open middleware especially where the interoperable and open nature of AMQP could be used to their advantage. I also have an ongoing interest in developing some testing ideas based on aspects of model checking, as I wrote the junit-toolkit, and am interested in ways in which logic programming can be used to generate and evaluate test cases. I'm currently an active committer and fully independant at the time of the proposed graduation. Hope this helps you make your minds up. Best regards, Rupert On 25/03/2008, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Robert Greig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 25/03/2008, Robert Greig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's drop the legally qualifier from independent... this isn't the IRS :-) In that case I would claim that I am also independent. Although I work for JPMC I am not paid to work on the Qpid project and all my contributions for the last 14 months have been in my own time. As anyone can see from my public LinkedIn profile, I am an architect for the cash equities business. That's cool. I'd much rather have people put it all out there and let others decide (full disclosure). Intersecting affiliations should be disclosed IMO. Doesn't matter what that affiliation is... working for part time, full time, indirectly, an indirect client of, working on site, whatever. The whole secrecy thing is strange. Is Rupert one of those guys who can't reveal his affiliations (including people he works with and end clients, not just middle-men)? -Yonik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP
-1 I agree with Dan, Robert, et al that QPid is on the right track and should be ready to graduate in a couple of months. Currently the absolute minimum diversity claim is barely met, with quite some debate regarding this is the case or not. Martijn On 3/23/08, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Changing subject to match ... -Original Message- From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 22:16 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: RE: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP] -1 Agreeing with Dan Kulp, Robert, Dims, et al. I encourage QPid to keep going, and am happy with its progress, but would like to see additional diversity in the community. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
Hi Rupert, This statement convinces me that you are an independent committer on the project. I think it would be good for everyone on the qpid project who consider themselves to be independent to post a similar statement. I'd probably go further, and ask that the statements be included in the who we are section of the public qpid incubator project site. I think this would go a long way toward making the incubator pmc members more comfortable about the diversity of the project. I understand that some consulting contracts have explicit clauses that require that the consultant *not* publicize their working relationships with clients. But I think that it's possible for qpid committers to make statements similar to Rupert's below, to the effect that even though they might have worked on a project that used qpid, or were at some point paid to work on qpid, that their current contributions and activities are on their own nickel. And I hope that Rupert doesn't get into trouble with JPMC over this disclosure. Craig On Mar 25, 2008, at 3:11 PM, Rupert Smith wrote: I don't mean to be secretive so I shall clarify things for you. I have provided consultancy to JPMC and this did relate to Qpid, particularly helping some of their teams to get set up with it. However, I have never been covered by a corporate CLA but signed it as an individual contributor. This was because I was not ever an employee of JPMC but provided consultancy through another company. Our contract stated something along the lines of JPMC specify what it is that they need, but is up to the contractor to decide how, where, when this is fulfilled (in order to make it clear that I was not an employee). In other words, I chose of my own independent free will to recomend Qpid as a solution for them, and contributed to it as an independant entity to further our mutual aims, rather than being employed specifically to work on it. I have finished consulting for JPMC but am still a committer to the project. I have an active interest in other customers who could benefit from free and open middleware especially where the interoperable and open nature of AMQP could be used to their advantage. I also have an ongoing interest in developing some testing ideas based on aspects of model checking, as I wrote the junit-toolkit, and am interested in ways in which logic programming can be used to generate and evaluate test cases. I'm currently an active committer and fully independant at the time of the proposed graduation. Hope this helps you make your minds up. Best regards, Rupert On 25/03/2008, Yonik Seeley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:44 PM, Robert Greig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 25/03/2008, Robert Greig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's drop the legally qualifier from independent... this isn't the IRS :-) In that case I would claim that I am also independent. Although I work for JPMC I am not paid to work on the Qpid project and all my contributions for the last 14 months have been in my own time. As anyone can see from my public LinkedIn profile, I am an architect for the cash equities business. That's cool. I'd much rather have people put it all out there and let others decide (full disclosure). Intersecting affiliations should be disclosed IMO. Doesn't matter what that affiliation is... working for part time, full time, indirectly, an indirect client of, working on site, whatever. The whole secrecy thing is strange. Is Rupert one of those guys who can't reveal his affiliations (including people he works with and end clients, not just middle-men)? -Yonik - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: [DISCUSSION] Hama Proposal
On Mar 24, 2008, at 1:56 AM, edward yoon wrote: Dear IPMC, I´m still waiting for hadoop's answer, but IMO, I would like to continue to discuss this. Apache (incubator) Pig project is built on top of Hadoop, but it is not a hadoop sub-project. Each different concept of project has inherently different characteristics for its domain, so by knowing the concept of project, we can get a clear view of their project. I think hama applies in this case, too. Seems reasonable to bring it back here at this point, since Hadoop has not responded. Can you fill in the background on the 4 proposed committers a bit? Do you all work together or not? It's not clear from the proposal, as it seems to suggest that you don't (Homogenous Devs section), but then later in the Reliance on Salaried Devs it suggests that you 3 of you do, but it may just be I am misreading the proposal. -Grant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
That is a little misleading. Committers can and do have binding votes. However, there are some things such as releases that must have PMC binding votes. Binding decisions are made by PMC members. Votes on new Committers, new PMC Members, and new Releases, all decided by each PMC. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Statements from Qpid mentors would help me decide... [WAS Re: [VOTE] Apache Qpid Graduation as TLP]
Martijn Dashorst wrote: No, committers *don't* have binding votes: Binding Votes 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. Hmmm... this is the first and only time I've seen a policy statement that discourages active contributors from casting a(n advisory) vote when they've reviewed the contribution/release/etc etc. I personally think it's counterproductive advise; those who are active continuously, bother to submit patches, solve bugs, cast votes and are generally responsive on list are usually the ones who should be considered to grow the community as new PMC members. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DISCUSSION] Hama Proposal
Thank you very much for your advice.
I was going to fix that.
Last year I worked as a full-time open source developer at RD center
at NHN (search service company) for hadoop and hbase, and now i worked
for development projects in real service areas. Some (minchang,
changhee) are my fellow workers, Others { chanwit (Student), yongho
(TMAX software, database company), taehui (KRIBB, biomedical
government research center) } are came from hadoop community.
--
== Homogenous Developers ==
The current list of committers includes developers from several
different companies ( NHN, corp, TMAX software, Korea Research
Institute of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Students) plus many
independent volunteers. The committers are geographically distributed
across the Europe, and Asia. They are experienced with working in a
distributed environment.
== Reliance on Salaried Developers ==
It is expected that Hama development will occur on both salaried time
and on volunteer time, after hours. While there is reliance on
salaried developers (currently from NHN, corp, but it's expected that
other company's salaried developers will also be involved), the Hama
Community is very active and things should balance out fairly quickly.
In the meantime, NHN, corp will support the project in the future by
dedicating 'work time' to Hama, so that there is a smooth transition.
Thanks,
Edward.
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Grant Ingersoll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 24, 2008, at 1:56 AM, edward yoon wrote:
Dear IPMC,
I´m still waiting for hadoop's answer, but IMO, I would like to
continue to discuss this.
Apache (incubator) Pig project is built on top of Hadoop, but it is
not a hadoop sub-project.
Each different concept of project has inherently different
characteristics for its domain,
so by knowing the concept of project, we can get a clear view of
their project.
I think hama applies in this case, too.
Seems reasonable to bring it back here at this point, since Hadoop has
not responded.
Can you fill in the background on the 4 proposed committers a bit? Do
you all work together or not? It's not clear from the proposal, as it
seems to suggest that you don't (Homogenous Devs section), but then
later in the Reliance on Salaried Devs it suggests that you 3 of you
do, but it may just be I am misreading the proposal.
-Grant
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
B. Regards,
Edward yoon @ NHN, corp.
