[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Geode (incubating) 1.0.0-incubating.M2

[Dan Smith]

The vote passes with 3 binding +1 votes and no -1s:

Roman Shaposhnik
Justin Mclean
Konstantin Boudnik

Thanks for reviewing this release and voting! We'll move on to finalizing
the release and announcing it.

-Dan, on behalf of the Apache Geode (incubating) team

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Konstantin Boudnik  wrote:

> +1 [biding]
>
> Signature is good
> sha256 is good
> release tar content matches the commit
> build works out of the source code
>
> Minor stuff on top of Justin's detailed analysis:
>   - suffix for sha256 file is better be sha256, looks confusing otherwise
>   - the file itself isn't properly formatted, which prevents automatic
> checksum
> validation with 'sha256sum -c'
>   - make sure to have your keys signed by others, so they are a part of
> wider
> WOT
>
> Cos
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:08PM, Dan Smith wrote:
> > Hello Incubator PMC,
> >
> > This is a call for a vote on the Apache Geode (incubating) release
> > 1.0.0-incubating.M2.
> >
> > This release candidate, 1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2, has successfully passed
> a
> > vote for a release
> > on the geode developer mailing list.
> >
> > Vote thread:
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAFh%2B7k12K%2B2G%2BbPktOwrSs-9CFc_W2%2BKS%3DyE%2BxTXt_AFfjeQWQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > Results:
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAFh%2B7k1Bm0XstRZexAUhket1k3sKeP_vMP5T%2Bmrr7QV1j7-t9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12318420=12334709
> >
> > Release candidate tag:
> > rel/v1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/rel/v1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2
> >
> > Commit ID: 3ac74a4e2c72677ef7c85df77922c645c7cce598
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=commit;h=3ac74a4e2c72677ef7c85df77922c645c7cce598
> >
> > Source and binary files:
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/geode/1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2/
> >
> > Maven staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeode-1004/
> >
> > Geode's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=refs/heads/release/1.0.0-incubating.M2
> >
> > Release Key: pub   4096R/A1688D97 2016-01-20
> > Fingerprint: 1776 0439 68F0 FD83 62C7  2CCF 444C 1D20 A168 8D97
> >
> > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Geode
> 1.0.0-incubating.M2:
> >
> > This vote will be open for 72 hours.
> >
> > [ ] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Dan on behalf of the Apache Geode (incubating) team
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geode (incubating) 1.0.0-incubating.M2

[Dan Smith]

Thanks!

I filed GEODE-1271 for the sha256 issues.

-Dan

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Konstantin Boudnik  wrote:

> +1 [biding]
>
> Signature is good
> sha256 is good
> release tar content matches the commit
> build works out of the source code
>
> Minor stuff on top of Justin's detailed analysis:
>   - suffix for sha256 file is better be sha256, looks confusing otherwise
>   - the file itself isn't properly formatted, which prevents automatic
> checksum
> validation with 'sha256sum -c'
>   - make sure to have your keys signed by others, so they are a part of
> wider
> WOT
>
> Cos
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:08PM, Dan Smith wrote:
> > Hello Incubator PMC,
> >
> > This is a call for a vote on the Apache Geode (incubating) release
> > 1.0.0-incubating.M2.
> >
> > This release candidate, 1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2, has successfully passed
> a
> > vote for a release
> > on the geode developer mailing list.
> >
> > Vote thread:
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAFh%2B7k12K%2B2G%2BbPktOwrSs-9CFc_W2%2BKS%3DyE%2BxTXt_AFfjeQWQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > Results:
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAFh%2B7k1Bm0XstRZexAUhket1k3sKeP_vMP5T%2Bmrr7QV1j7-t9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > It fixes the following issues:
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12318420=12334709
> >
> > Release candidate tag:
> > rel/v1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/rel/v1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2
> >
> > Commit ID: 3ac74a4e2c72677ef7c85df77922c645c7cce598
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=commit;h=3ac74a4e2c72677ef7c85df77922c645c7cce598
> >
> > Source and binary files:
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/geode/1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2/
> >
> > Maven staging repo:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeode-1004/
> >
> > Geode's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=refs/heads/release/1.0.0-incubating.M2
> >
> > Release Key: pub   4096R/A1688D97 2016-01-20
> > Fingerprint: 1776 0439 68F0 FD83 62C7  2CCF 444C 1D20 A168 8D97
> >
> > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Geode
> 1.0.0-incubating.M2:
> >
> > This vote will be open for 72 hours.
> >
> > [ ] +1 approve
> > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Dan on behalf of the Apache Geode (incubating) team
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geode (incubating) 1.0.0-incubating.M2

[Konstantin Boudnik]

+1 [biding]

Signature is good
sha256 is good
release tar content matches the commit
build works out of the source code

Minor stuff on top of Justin's detailed analysis:
  - suffix for sha256 file is better be sha256, looks confusing otherwise
  - the file itself isn't properly formatted, which prevents automatic checksum
validation with 'sha256sum -c'
  - make sure to have your keys signed by others, so they are a part of wider
WOT

Cos

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:08PM, Dan Smith wrote:
> Hello Incubator PMC,
> 
> This is a call for a vote on the Apache Geode (incubating) release
> 1.0.0-incubating.M2.
> 
> This release candidate, 1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2, has successfully passed a
> vote for a release
> on the geode developer mailing list.
> 
> Vote thread:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAFh%2B7k12K%2B2G%2BbPktOwrSs-9CFc_W2%2BKS%3DyE%2BxTXt_AFfjeQWQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> 
> Results:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAFh%2B7k1Bm0XstRZexAUhket1k3sKeP_vMP5T%2Bmrr7QV1j7-t9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> 
> It fixes the following issues:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12318420=12334709
> 
> Release candidate tag:
> rel/v1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/rel/v1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2
> 
> Commit ID: 3ac74a4e2c72677ef7c85df77922c645c7cce598
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=commit;h=3ac74a4e2c72677ef7c85df77922c645c7cce598
> 
> Source and binary files:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/geode/1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2/
> 
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeode-1004/
> 
> Geode's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=refs/heads/release/1.0.0-incubating.M2
> 
> Release Key: pub   4096R/A1688D97 2016-01-20
> Fingerprint: 1776 0439 68F0 FD83 62C7  2CCF 444C 1D20 A168 8D97
> 
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Geode 1.0.0-incubating.M2:
> 
> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
> 
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
> 
> Thanks!
> Dan on behalf of the Apache Geode (incubating) team


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geode (incubating) 1.0.0-incubating.M2

[Dan Smith]

Looks like we still need one more binding vote on this release. Could
someone please take a look and vote?

Thanks!
-Dan

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Dan Smith 
wrote:

> Hello Incubator PMC,
>
> This is a call for a vote on the Apache Geode (incubating) release
> 1.0.0-incubating.M2.
>
> This release candidate, 1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2, has successfully passed a
> vote for a release
> on the geode developer mailing list.
>
> Vote thread:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAFh%2B7k12K%2B2G%2BbPktOwrSs-9CFc_W2%2BKS%3DyE%2BxTXt_AFfjeQWQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>
> Results:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAFh%2B7k1Bm0XstRZexAUhket1k3sKeP_vMP5T%2Bmrr7QV1j7-t9Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>
> It fixes the following issues:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12318420=12334709
>
> Release candidate tag:
> rel/v1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/rel/v1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2
>
> Commit ID: 3ac74a4e2c72677ef7c85df77922c645c7cce598
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=commit;h=3ac74a4e2c72677ef7c85df77922c645c7cce598
>
> Source and binary files:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/geode/1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2/
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeode-1004/
>
> Geode's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-geode.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=refs/heads/release/1.0.0-incubating.M2
>
> Release Key: pub   4096R/A1688D97 2016-01-20
> Fingerprint: 1776 0439 68F0 FD83 62C7  2CCF 444C 1D20 A168 8D97
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Geode 1.0.0-incubating.M2:
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks!
> Dan on behalf of the Apache Geode (incubating) team
>

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Apex Core 3.2.1-incubating released

[Vlad Rozov]

The Apache Apex community is pleased to announce release 
3.2.1-incubating (Apex Core).


Changes: 
https://github.com/apache/incubator-apex-core/blob/v3.2.1-incubating/CHANGELOG.md


Apache Apex is an enterprise grade native YARN big data-in-motion 
platform that unifies stream and batch processing. Apex was built for 
scalability and low-latency processing, high availability and operability.


This is a source release with binary artifacts published to Maven. The 
source release can be found at:


http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/incubator/apex/v3.2.1-incubating/apex-3.2.1-incubating-source-release.tar.gz

or visit:

http://apex.incubator.apache.org/downloads.html

We welcome your help and feedback. For more information on the project 
and how to get involved, visit our website at:


http://apex.incubator.apache.org/

Regards,

The Apache Apex community


Disclaimer: Apache Apex is an effort undergoing incubation at the Apache 
Software Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator PMC. 
Incubation is required of all newly accepted projects until a further 
review indicates that the infrastructure, communications, and decision 
making process have stabilized in a manner consistent with other 
successful ASF projects. While incubation status is not necessarily a 
reflection of the completeness or stability of the code, it does 
indicate that the project has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.



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

Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (HAWQ-694) 1844-313-4857 Quickbooks payroll support usa/canada

[Gregory Chase]

Cool and thanks!

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Mark Thomas  wrote:

> On 21/04/2016 21:40, Gregory Chase wrote:
> > Seems we have a JIRA user who's spamming Apache HAWQ? Is this a
> compromised
> > account, or someone who has access that shouldn't?
>
> It is a public Jira instance on which anyone can create an account.
> Sometimes spam happens. It is the cost of an open development process.
>
> The infra team is already on the case to clean up the spam and is
> looking into what further filtering can be applied to reduce future
> instances.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Greg Chase

Global Head, Big Data Communities
http://www.pivotal.io/big-data

Pivotal Software
http://www.pivotal.io/

650-215-0477
@GregChase
Blog: http://geekmarketing.biz/

Re: Fwd: [jira] [Created] (HAWQ-694) 1844-313-4857 Quickbooks payroll support usa/canada

[Mark Thomas]

On 21/04/2016 21:40, Gregory Chase wrote:
> Seems we have a JIRA user who's spamming Apache HAWQ? Is this a compromised
> account, or someone who has access that shouldn't?

It is a public Jira instance on which anyone can create an account.
Sometimes spam happens. It is the cost of an open development process.

The infra team is already on the case to clean up the spam and is
looking into what further filtering can be applied to reduce future
instances.

Mark



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

Fwd: [jira] [Created] (HAWQ-694) 1844-313-4857 Quickbooks payroll support usa/canada

[Gregory Chase]

Seems we have a JIRA user who's spamming Apache HAWQ? Is this a compromised
account, or someone who has access that shouldn't?

-Greg
-- Forwarded message --
From: Kalramin (JIRA) 
Date: Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:34 PM
Subject: [jira] [Created] (HAWQ-694) 1844-313-4857 Quickbooks payroll
support usa/canada
To: iss...@hawq.incubator.apache.org


Kalramin created HAWQ-694:
-

 Summary: 1844-313-4857 Quickbooks  payroll support usa/canada
 Key: HAWQ-694
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAWQ-694
 Project: Apache HAWQ
  Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Kalramin
Assignee: Lei Chang


1844-313-4857 Quickbooks  payroll support usa/canada1844-313-4857
Quickbooks  payroll support usa/canada cloud hostinggeneralQuickbooks
cloudcloud computing can be thought 1844-313-4857 as any instance where
you're using a computer that resides outside 1844-313-4857 your physical
locationQuickbooks cloud Most users encounter cloud computing  cloud
hostingthe form 1844-313-4857 s1844-313-4857tware as a serviceQuickbooks
cloud You might pay a fee for the serviceQuickbooks cloudsuch as QuickBooks
OnlineQuickbooks cloudSalesforceQuickbooks cloudcomQuickbooks cloudor
Micros1844-313-4857t's 1844-313-4857fice 365Quickbooks cloudor you may pay
cloud hostinga nonmonetary fashion through an advertising-supported and/or
information-gathering modelsQuickbooks cloudsuch as GmailQuickbooks
cloudMintQuickbooks cloudor FacebookQuickbooks cloud

Cloud computing gives you access to an environment that you can customize
or build out to suit your needsQuickbooks cloud With SaaSQuickbooks
cloudyou're limited to the features and capabilities written into the
s1844-313-4857twareQuickbooks cloudbut cloud computing 1844-313-4857fers
the ability to increase server capacity or storage space on
demandQuickbooks cloud
Cloud computing 1844-313-4857fers elasticityQuickbooks cloudmeaning your
resources and costs can increase or decrease with your demandsQuickbooks
cloud SaaS typically involves a set fee per userQuickbooks cloudper
monthQuickbooks cloudso costs and the functionality 1844-313-4857fered tend
to be fixedQuickbooks cloud
 cloud hostingshortQuickbooks cloudcloud computing is highly
customizableQuickbooks cloudwhereas SaaS 1844-313-4857fers more
1844-313-4857 Quickbooks cloudapproachQuickbooks cloud

For SaaSQuickbooks cloudend users are removed from maintaining both the
application and the server equipmentQuickbooks cloud Benefits 1844-313-4857
SaaS versus desktop programs include:
ApplicationsQuickbooks cloudsuch as QuickBooks OnlineQuickbooks cloudallow
you to access accounting records from anywhere  cloud hostingthe
worldQuickbooks cloudinstead 1844-313-4857 from specific computers with
cloud hostingyour 1844-313-4857ficeQuickbooks cloud
New features appear  cloud hostingthe s1844-313-4857tware
automaticallyQuickbooks cloudso there's no need to purchase a
s1844-313-4857tware upgrade to be physically installed on each
1844-313-4857 your computersQuickbooks cloud
Your data is backed up automaticallyQuickbooks cloudso a local hard drive
crash won't affect your dataQuickbooks cloud

Consider the recent situation with megauploadQuickbooks cloudcomQuickbooks
cloudwhere certa cloud hostingpurported illegal actions 1844-313-4857 a
subset 1844-313-4857 users caused everyone using the service to lose access
to dataQuickbooks cloud Think about a toddler having a certa cloud
hostingbodily function  cloud hostinga public swimming pool Quickbooks
cloud everyone has to suddenly get out 1844-313-4857 the waterQuickbooks
cloud SimilarlyQuickbooks cloudactions 1844-313-4857 one or more rogue
users can cause unexpected and dramatic disruptions for everyone else
sharing a cloud-based resourceQuickbooks cloud
Both cloud computing and SaaS involve trustQuickbooks cloud cloud
hostingthat you're trusting an organization to hold up its end
1844-313-4857 the bargainQuickbooks cloud IntuitQuickbooks cloudmaker
1844-313-4857 QuickBooksQuickbooks cloudlast year experienced a spate
1844-313-4857 outages that caused business interruptions for users
1844-313-4857 their myriad online servicesQuickbooks cloud
A service you trust and rely on could suddenly change handsQuickbooks
cloudsuch as Facebook's recent acquisition 1844-313-4857
InstagramQuickbooks cloud You may then be forced to find a new service
provider if you have philosophical differences with the new owner
1844-313-4857 a tool that you've relied on or if customer service levels
start to slip to unacceptable levelsQuickbooks cloud
If you stop paying for the serviceQuickbooks cloudaccess to your data can
be immediately terminatedQuickbooks cloud HoweverQuickbooks cloudmany
providers 1844-313-4857fer a grace periodQuickbooks cloud For
instanceQuickbooks cloudif you cancel your QuickBooks Online
accountQuickbooks cloudyour data is maintained for a yearQuickbooks
cloudshould you 

Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal

[Edward Capriolo]

@P. Taylor,

Thanks for the detailed recap. As you mentioned we did contact those
authors hoping to hear back.

When I did the fork I did inform the original author:
https://code.google.com/archive/p/java-gossip/issues/2

IIRC the owner this event with a like or a +1 (or whatever they provided),
but with the state of google groups I find no way to prove this statement.
:)

Thanks,
Edward

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 12:23 PM, P. Taylor Goetz  wrote:

> Here’s the fork history:
>
> gossip-protocol-java [1] —> gossip-java [2] —> Edwards github repo [3]
>
> Both [1] and [2] appear to be developed by a single person. With very
> little development (each has only two commits, by a single author, dating
> back to 2010). Both projects were also ASLv2 from the start.
>
> Both authors have been contacted, and would be welcomed as initial
> committers should they respond with interest.
>
> The Metron discussion Sean mentioned seems to start here [4]. The
> circumstances with Metron were very different from what we are looking at
> in this case.
>
> -Taylor
>
> [1] https://code.google.com/archive/p/gossip-protocol-java/
> [2] https://code.google.com/archive/p/java-gossip/
> [3] https://github.com/edwardcapriolo/gossip
> [4]
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201512.mbox/%3ccajwfca39pe37jtsc+09cwopprrtvyvoodbk_reesltkh59f...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
> On Apr 21, 2016, at 11:41 AM, Sean Busbey  wrote:
>
> This got discussed at length over the Metron proposal. We only need to
> worry about an SGA from the original codebase authors if there is
> still an active community.
>
> AFAICT, there is not. A notice to the original authors about what's
> happening with encouragement for them to show up if they're interested
> should suffice.
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:52 AM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>
> If you don't mind, I'll open a LEGAL ticket to check on the who of the SGA,
> if you haven't already.  It'll be good to know for future discussions as
> well.
>
> John
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:56 AM Taylor Goetz  wrote:
>
> Lewis, please be patient.
>
> Edward and I are working on getting ICLAs signed, etc., and that process
> shouldn't block entry into the incubator.
>
> From an IP perspective, the age of the original codebase has no relevance.
>
> I will call a vote soon, but not until I'm confident that the IPMC has had
> adequate time to comment, and that those comments have been addressed.
>
> -Taylor
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ed,
> If you were able to track down the GoogleCode authors and update this
> thread then that would be good.
>
> @John,
> bq. > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would
>
> be
>
> expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
>
>
> From whom? The old GoogleCode community who have not touched this
>
> codebase
>
> in over a year? If that is the case then this might get very tricky
>
> indeed!
>
>
> Regardless, this does not block a VOTE on proposing Gossip for the
> Incubator. It is something which may resolve itself at a later date. I
> would suggest that this bridge can be crossed when the Gossip incubating
> community comes to it.
>
> I'll look forward to the Champion opening a VOTE thread.
> Thanks
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:46 PM, <
>
> general-digest-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> wrote:
>
> From: Roman Shaposhnik 
> To: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:25:43 -0700
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:55 AM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>
> I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would be
> expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
>
>
> That's the usual protocol.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> busbey
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal

[P. Taylor Goetz]

Here’s the fork history:

gossip-protocol-java [1] —> gossip-java [2] —> Edwards github repo [3]

Both [1] and [2] appear to be developed by a single person. With very little 
development (each has only two commits, by a single author, dating back to 
2010). Both projects were also ASLv2 from the start.

Both authors have been contacted, and would be welcomed as initial committers 
should they respond with interest.

The Metron discussion Sean mentioned seems to start here [4]. The circumstances 
with Metron were very different from what we are looking at in this case.

-Taylor

[1] https://code.google.com/archive/p/gossip-protocol-java/ 

[2] https://code.google.com/archive/p/java-gossip/ 

[3] https://github.com/edwardcapriolo/gossip 

[4] 
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201512.mbox/%3ccajwfca39pe37jtsc+09cwopprrtvyvoodbk_reesltkh59f...@mail.gmail.com%3e

> On Apr 21, 2016, at 11:41 AM, Sean Busbey  wrote:
> 
> This got discussed at length over the Metron proposal. We only need to
> worry about an SGA from the original codebase authors if there is
> still an active community.
> 
> AFAICT, there is not. A notice to the original authors about what's
> happening with encouragement for them to show up if they're interested
> should suffice.
> 
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:52 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
>> If you don't mind, I'll open a LEGAL ticket to check on the who of the SGA,
>> if you haven't already.  It'll be good to know for future discussions as
>> well.
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:56 AM Taylor Goetz  wrote:
>> 
>>> Lewis, please be patient.
>>> 
>>> Edward and I are working on getting ICLAs signed, etc., and that process
>>> shouldn't block entry into the incubator.
>>> 
>>> From an IP perspective, the age of the original codebase has no relevance.
>>> 
>>> I will call a vote soon, but not until I'm confident that the IPMC has had
>>> adequate time to comment, and that those comments have been addressed.
>>> 
>>> -Taylor
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
>>> lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
 Hi Ed,
 If you were able to track down the GoogleCode authors and update this
 thread then that would be good.
 
 @John,
 bq. > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would
>>> be
> expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
 
 From whom? The old GoogleCode community who have not touched this
>>> codebase
 in over a year? If that is the case then this might get very tricky
>>> indeed!
 
 Regardless, this does not block a VOTE on proposing Gossip for the
 Incubator. It is something which may resolve itself at a later date. I
 would suggest that this bridge can be crossed when the Gossip incubating
 community comes to it.
 
 I'll look forward to the Champion opening a VOTE thread.
 Thanks
 
 
 On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:46 PM, <
>>> general-digest-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 
 wrote:
 
> From: Roman Shaposhnik 
> To: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
> Cc:
> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:25:43 -0700
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:55 AM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>> I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would be
>> expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
> 
> That's the usual protocol.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.
> 
> 
 
>>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> busbey
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal

[John D. Ament]

Sean,

Could you provide a link to the discussion?

John

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 11:41 AM Sean Busbey  wrote:

> This got discussed at length over the Metron proposal. We only need to
> worry about an SGA from the original codebase authors if there is
> still an active community.
>
> AFAICT, there is not. A notice to the original authors about what's
> happening with encouragement for them to show up if they're interested
> should suffice.
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:52 AM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
> > If you don't mind, I'll open a LEGAL ticket to check on the who of the
> SGA,
> > if you haven't already.  It'll be good to know for future discussions as
> > well.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:56 AM Taylor Goetz  wrote:
> >
> >> Lewis, please be patient.
> >>
> >> Edward and I are working on getting ICLAs signed, etc., and that process
> >> shouldn't block entry into the incubator.
> >>
> >> From an IP perspective, the age of the original codebase has no
> relevance.
> >>
> >> I will call a vote soon, but not until I'm confident that the IPMC has
> had
> >> adequate time to comment, and that those comments have been addressed.
> >>
> >> -Taylor
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> >> lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Ed,
> >> > If you were able to track down the GoogleCode authors and update this
> >> > thread then that would be good.
> >> >
> >> > @John,
> >> > bq. > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA
> would
> >> be
> >> > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
> >> >
> >> > From whom? The old GoogleCode community who have not touched this
> >> codebase
> >> > in over a year? If that is the case then this might get very tricky
> >> indeed!
> >> >
> >> > Regardless, this does not block a VOTE on proposing Gossip for the
> >> > Incubator. It is something which may resolve itself at a later date. I
> >> > would suggest that this bridge can be crossed when the Gossip
> incubating
> >> > community comes to it.
> >> >
> >> > I'll look forward to the Champion opening a VOTE thread.
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:46 PM, <
> >> general-digest-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >> > >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > From: Roman Shaposhnik 
> >> > > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
> >> > > Cc:
> >> > > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:25:43 -0700
> >> > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal
> >> > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:55 AM, John D. Ament <
> johndam...@apache.org>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA
> would be
> >> > > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
> >> > >
> >> > > That's the usual protocol.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > Roman.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> busbey
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal

[Sean Busbey]

This got discussed at length over the Metron proposal. We only need to
worry about an SGA from the original codebase authors if there is
still an active community.

AFAICT, there is not. A notice to the original authors about what's
happening with encouragement for them to show up if they're interested
should suffice.

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:52 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> If you don't mind, I'll open a LEGAL ticket to check on the who of the SGA,
> if you haven't already.  It'll be good to know for future discussions as
> well.
>
> John
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:56 AM Taylor Goetz  wrote:
>
>> Lewis, please be patient.
>>
>> Edward and I are working on getting ICLAs signed, etc., and that process
>> shouldn't block entry into the incubator.
>>
>> From an IP perspective, the age of the original codebase has no relevance.
>>
>> I will call a vote soon, but not until I'm confident that the IPMC has had
>> adequate time to comment, and that those comments have been addressed.
>>
>> -Taylor
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
>> lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Ed,
>> > If you were able to track down the GoogleCode authors and update this
>> > thread then that would be good.
>> >
>> > @John,
>> > bq. > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would
>> be
>> > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
>> >
>> > From whom? The old GoogleCode community who have not touched this
>> codebase
>> > in over a year? If that is the case then this might get very tricky
>> indeed!
>> >
>> > Regardless, this does not block a VOTE on proposing Gossip for the
>> > Incubator. It is something which may resolve itself at a later date. I
>> > would suggest that this bridge can be crossed when the Gossip incubating
>> > community comes to it.
>> >
>> > I'll look forward to the Champion opening a VOTE thread.
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:46 PM, <
>> general-digest-h...@incubator.apache.org
>> > >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > From: Roman Shaposhnik 
>> > > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
>> > > Cc:
>> > > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:25:43 -0700
>> > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal
>> > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:55 AM, John D. Ament 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would be
>> > > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
>> > >
>> > > That's the usual protocol.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Roman.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>



-- 
busbey

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

Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal

[Edward Capriolo]

That is a good plan to understand the code hand over. I mentioned this in
another reply, but if this presents and issue I am more than happy to do a
clean room implementation. There are a few reasons for this:

Firstly, we want to make a spec so that other implementations in other
languages can be build this might be easier if we truly start from a spec,
instead of reverse engineering a spec from the existing code. Secondly,
even though the code is already present, I suspect that as we implement
things on the road map the code base will change fairly drastically and
little of the original code will be in places after 2-3 releases.

To recap: If importing the current code is an issue, we can adjust the
proposal to do a clean room implementation. It adds complexity but not
anything insurmountable.

Thanks,
Edward

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 7:52 AM, John D. Ament 
wrote:

> If you don't mind, I'll open a LEGAL ticket to check on the who of the SGA,
> if you haven't already.  It'll be good to know for future discussions as
> well.
>
> John
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:56 AM Taylor Goetz  wrote:
>
> > Lewis, please be patient.
> >
> > Edward and I are working on getting ICLAs signed, etc., and that process
> > shouldn't block entry into the incubator.
> >
> > From an IP perspective, the age of the original codebase has no
> relevance.
> >
> > I will call a vote soon, but not until I'm confident that the IPMC has
> had
> > adequate time to comment, and that those comments have been addressed.
> >
> > -Taylor
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> > lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Ed,
> > > If you were able to track down the GoogleCode authors and update this
> > > thread then that would be good.
> > >
> > > @John,
> > > bq. > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA
> would
> > be
> > > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
> > >
> > > From whom? The old GoogleCode community who have not touched this
> > codebase
> > > in over a year? If that is the case then this might get very tricky
> > indeed!
> > >
> > > Regardless, this does not block a VOTE on proposing Gossip for the
> > > Incubator. It is something which may resolve itself at a later date. I
> > > would suggest that this bridge can be crossed when the Gossip
> incubating
> > > community comes to it.
> > >
> > > I'll look forward to the Champion opening a VOTE thread.
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:46 PM, <
> > general-digest-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Roman Shaposhnik 
> > > > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
> > > > Cc:
> > > > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:25:43 -0700
> > > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal
> > > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:55 AM, John D. Ament <
> johndam...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would
> be
> > > > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
> > > >
> > > > That's the usual protocol.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Roman.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal

[John D. Ament]

If you don't mind, I'll open a LEGAL ticket to check on the who of the SGA,
if you haven't already.  It'll be good to know for future discussions as
well.

John

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:56 AM Taylor Goetz  wrote:

> Lewis, please be patient.
>
> Edward and I are working on getting ICLAs signed, etc., and that process
> shouldn't block entry into the incubator.
>
> From an IP perspective, the age of the original codebase has no relevance.
>
> I will call a vote soon, but not until I'm confident that the IPMC has had
> adequate time to comment, and that those comments have been addressed.
>
> -Taylor
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 1:02 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ed,
> > If you were able to track down the GoogleCode authors and update this
> > thread then that would be good.
> >
> > @John,
> > bq. > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would
> be
> > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
> >
> > From whom? The old GoogleCode community who have not touched this
> codebase
> > in over a year? If that is the case then this might get very tricky
> indeed!
> >
> > Regardless, this does not block a VOTE on proposing Gossip for the
> > Incubator. It is something which may resolve itself at a later date. I
> > would suggest that this bridge can be crossed when the Gossip incubating
> > community comes to it.
> >
> > I'll look forward to the Champion opening a VOTE thread.
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:46 PM, <
> general-digest-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > From: Roman Shaposhnik 
> > > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
> > > Cc:
> > > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:25:43 -0700
> > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal
> > > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:55 AM, John D. Ament 
> > > wrote:
> > > > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would be
> > > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
> > >
> > > That's the usual protocol.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal

[Stian Soiland-Reyes]

Ideal would be if Gossip were able to track down original authors and
invite them on as committers (even passive) and get a SGA from them.
Nevertheless SGA(s) for the contributions to the fork would also be good
(although they would also be covered by the Apache license's contribution
clause).

Otherwise there also could also be issues with the name Apache Gossip of
the original "lives on", so you would have to be prepared to change the
name, if needed.
On 21 Apr 2016 6:02 a.m., "Lewis John Mcgibbney" 
wrote:

> Hi Ed,
> If you were able to track down the GoogleCode authors and update this
> thread then that would be good.
>
> @John,
> bq. > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would be
> > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
>
> From whom? The old GoogleCode community who have not touched this codebase
> in over a year? If that is the case then this might get very tricky indeed!
>
> Regardless, this does not block a VOTE on proposing Gossip for the
> Incubator. It is something which may resolve itself at a later date. I
> would suggest that this bridge can be crossed when the Gossip incubating
> community comes to it.
>
> I'll look forward to the Champion opening a VOTE thread.
> Thanks
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:46 PM,  >
> wrote:
>
> > From: Roman Shaposhnik 
> > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
> > Cc:
> > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2016 08:25:43 -0700
> > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:55 AM, John D. Ament 
> > wrote:
> > > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would be
> > > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo.
> >
> > That's the usual protocol.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
> >
>