date:20181106

Hi,

Not sure about other people’s email reader but the formatting got a bit messed 
up for me.

Here’s a link to the proposal:
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IoTDBProposal

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

[VOTE] IoTDB incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread Xiangdong Huang

Hi, I'd like to call a VOTE to accept IoTDB project, a database for managing 
large amounts of time series data  from IoT sensors in industrial applications, 
into the Apache Incubator. The full proposal is available on the wiki: 
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IoTDBProposaland it is also attached below 
for your convenience. Please cast your vote:   [ ] +1, bring IoTDB into 
Incubator   [ ] +0, I don't care either way,   [ ] -1, do not bring IoTDB into 
Incubator, because... The vote will open at least for 72 hours. Thanks, 
Xiangdong Huang.
= IoTDB Proposal  = v0.1.1 == Abstract == IoTDB is a data store for managing 
large amounts of time series data such as timestamped data from IoT sensors in 
industrial applications. == Proposal == IoTDB is a database for managing large 
amount of time series data with columnar storage, data encoding, 
pre-computation, and index techniques. It has SQL-like interface to write 
millions of data points per second per node and is optimized to get query 
results in few seconds over trillions of data points. It can also be easily 
integrated with Apache Hadoop MapReduce and Apache Spark for analytics. == 
Background == A new class of data management system requirements is becoming 
increasingly important with the rise of the Internet of Things. There are some 
database systems and technologies aimed at time series data management.  For 
example, Gorilla and InfluxDB which are mainly built for data centers and 
monitoring application metrics. Other systems, for example, OpenTSDB and 
KairosDB, are built on Apache HBase and Apache Cassandra, respectively.  
However, many applications for time series data management have more 
requirements especially in industrial applications as follows:  * Supporting 
time series data which has high data frequency. For example, a turbine engine 
may generate 1000 points per second (i.e., 1000Hz), while each CPU only reports 
1 data points per 5 seconds in a data center monitoring application.  * 
Supporting scanning data multi-resolutionally. For example, aggregation 
operation is important for time series data.  * Supporting special queries for 
time series, such as pattern matching, time series segmentation, time-frequency 
transformation and frequency query.  * Supporting a large number of monitoring 
targets (i.e. time series). An excavator may report more than 1000 time series, 
for example, revolving speed of the motor-engine, the speed of the excavator, 
the accelerated speed, the temperature of the water tank and so on, while a CPU 
or an application monitor has much fewer time series.  * Optimization for 
out-of-order data points. In the industrial sector, it is common that equipment 
sends data using the UDP protocol rather than the TCP protocol. Sometimes, the 
network connect is unstable and parts of the data will be buffered for later 
sending.  * Supporting long-term storage. Historical data is precious for 
equipment manufacturers. Therefore, removing or unloading historical data is 
highly desired for most industrial applications. The database system must not 
only support fast retrieval of historical data, but also should guarantee that 
the historical data does not impact the processing speed for ??hot?? or current 
data.  * Supporting online transaction processing (OLTP) as well as complex 
analytics. It is obvious that supporting analyzing from the data files using 
Apache Spark/Apache Hadoop MapReduce directly is better than transforming data 
files to another file format for Big Data analytics.  * Flexible deployment 
either on premise or in the cloud.  IoTDB is as simple and can be deployed on a 
Raspberry Pi handling hundreds of time series. Meanwhile, the system can be 
also deployed in the cloud so that it supports tens of millions ingestions per 
second, OLTP queries in milliseconds, and analytics using Apache Spark/Apache 
Hadoop MapReduce.  * * (1) If users deploy IoTDB on a device, such as a 
Raspberry Pi, a wind turbine, or a meteorological station, the deployment of 
the chosen database is designed to be simple. A device may have hundreds of 
time series (but less than a thousand time series) and the database needs to 
handle them.  * * (2) When deploying IoTDB in a data center, the computational 
resources (i.e., the hardware configuration of servers) is not a problem when 
compared to a Raspberry Pi. In this deployment, IoTDB can use more computation 
resources, and has the ability to handle more time seires (e.g., millions of 
time series). Based on these requirements, we developed IoTDB, a new data store 
system for managing time series data.  IoTDB started as a Tsinghua University 
research project. IoTDB's developer community has also grown to include 
additional institutions, for example, universities (e.g., Fudan University), 
research labs (e.g, NEL-BDS lab), and corporations (e.g., K2Data, Tencent). 
Funding has been provided by various institutions including the National 
Natural Science

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread vintagewang

+1 (non-binding)

XIAORUI Wang

zhangli...@apache.org 于2018年11月7日 周三09:30写道：

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks,
> John(Zhang Liang) from Sharding-Sphere
>
> Bruno Mahé  于2018年11月7日周三 上午1:37写道：
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Bruno
> >
> > On 11/5/18 10:41 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > on behalf of Sharding-Sphere community, I'd like to call
> > > a VOTE to accept it into the Apache Incubator. The full
> > > proposal is available on the wiki:
> > >  https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ShardingSphereProposal
> > > and it is also attached below for your convenience.
> > >
> > > Please cast your vote:
> > >
> > >[ ] +1, bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator
> > >[ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > >[ ] -1, do not bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator, because...
> > >
> > > The vote will open at least for 72 hours.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > >
> > > = Abstract =
> > > Sharding-Sphere is an ecosystem of transparent distributed database
> > > middleware, focusing on data sharding, distributed transaction and
> > > database orchestration. It provides maximum compatibility for
> > > applications through Sharding-JDBC (a driver to implement JDBC) or
> > > Sharding-Proxy (a proxy to implement database protocol).
> > >
> > > = Proposal =
> > > With a large number of end users, Sharding-Sphere has a fairly huge
> > > community in China. It is also widely adopted by many
> > > [[http://shardingsphere.io/community/en/company/|companies and
> > > organizations]] as a solution to process their massive amounts of
> > > data.
> > >
> > > We believe that bringing Sharding-Sphere into Apache Software
> > > Foundation could advance development of a stronger and more diverse
> > > open source community.
> > >
> > > Dangdang submits this proposal to donate Sharding-Sphere's source
> > > codes and all related documentations to Apache Software Foundation.
> > > The codes are already under Apache License Version 2.0.
> > >
> > >* Code base: https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere
> > >
> > >* Web site: http://shardingsphere.io/
> > >
> > >* Documentations: http://shardingsphere.io/document/current/
> > >
> > >* Community: http://shardingsphere.io/community/
> > >
> > > = Background =
> > >
> > > Relational database hardly supports such huge amounts of data any more
> > > which has increased rapidly in recent years, but for reason of
> > > technique maturity, developers and DBAs still want to use it to
> > > persist core data.
> > >
> > > Sharding-Sphere was open sourced on Github in 2016. At the very
> > > beginning, Sharding-Sphere is just a JDBC driver for data sharding
> > > (name as Sharding-JDBC) at Dangdang internal framework; now it offers
> > > data sharding, distributed transaction and database orchestration.
> > > Besides JDBC, proxy to implement MySQL database protocol is also
> > > supported at present. Furthermore, our roadmap includes Proxy for
> > > PostgreSQL protocol, Sidecar model, data repica and elastic data
> > > scalability function as well.
> > >
> > > Due to the extension of project, we provide proxy model and sidecar
> > > model in addition to JDBC model. Therefore, we rename it to
> > > Sharding-Sphere by
> > > [[https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere/issues/788|a
> > > public vote]], which refers to a sharding ecosphere with
> > > Sharding-JDBC, Sharding-Proxy and Sharding Sidecar as its three
> > > sub-projects.
> > >
> > > Sharding-JDBC has won the
> > > [[http://www.oschina.net/project/top_cn_2016|TOP 20 most popular open
> > > source projects in China 2016]].
> > >
> > > = Rationale =
> > >
> > > Relational database still plays a very important role on current
> > > application system. The maturity of products and surrounding
> > > ecosystem, the friendliness of its data query and developers' and
> > > DBAs' mastery of it, cannot be completely replaced with other types of
> > > database in the near future. However, current relational database
> > > cannot support cloud native very well and it is not friendly to
> > > distributed system.
> > >
> > > It is the ultimate goal of Sharding-Sphere, which manages the
> > > databases scattering around the system, to make user use distributed
> > > databases as simply as using a single one.
> > >
> > > Without extra cost, Sharding-JDBC directly connects database with Java
> > > application to get the best performance.
> > >
> > > Sharding-Proxy is deployed as a stateless server and supports MySQL
> > > protocol at present. In the paper
> > > [[
> https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2016/pavlo-newsql-sigmodrec2016.pdf|What
> > ’s
> > > Really New with NewSQL?]], three types of NewSQL are introduced, among
> > > which Sharding-Proxy is a Transparent Sharding Middleware.
> > >
> > > Sharding-Sidecar can be understood as a data panel in Service Mesh.
> > > The interaction between the application and the database provides a
> > > mesh layer. The concept of Database Mesh is

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread zhangli...@apache.org

+1 (non-binding)

Thanks,
John(Zhang Liang) from Sharding-Sphere

Bruno Mahé  于2018年11月7日周三 上午1:37写道：

> +1 (non-binding)
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bruno
>
> On 11/5/18 10:41 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > on behalf of Sharding-Sphere community, I'd like to call
> > a VOTE to accept it into the Apache Incubator. The full
> > proposal is available on the wiki:
> >  https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ShardingSphereProposal
> > and it is also attached below for your convenience.
> >
> > Please cast your vote:
> >
> >[ ] +1, bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator
> >[ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> >[ ] -1, do not bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator, because...
> >
> > The vote will open at least for 72 hours.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
> > = Abstract =
> > Sharding-Sphere is an ecosystem of transparent distributed database
> > middleware, focusing on data sharding, distributed transaction and
> > database orchestration. It provides maximum compatibility for
> > applications through Sharding-JDBC (a driver to implement JDBC) or
> > Sharding-Proxy (a proxy to implement database protocol).
> >
> > = Proposal =
> > With a large number of end users, Sharding-Sphere has a fairly huge
> > community in China. It is also widely adopted by many
> > [[http://shardingsphere.io/community/en/company/|companies and
> > organizations]] as a solution to process their massive amounts of
> > data.
> >
> > We believe that bringing Sharding-Sphere into Apache Software
> > Foundation could advance development of a stronger and more diverse
> > open source community.
> >
> > Dangdang submits this proposal to donate Sharding-Sphere's source
> > codes and all related documentations to Apache Software Foundation.
> > The codes are already under Apache License Version 2.0.
> >
> >* Code base: https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere
> >
> >* Web site: http://shardingsphere.io/
> >
> >* Documentations: http://shardingsphere.io/document/current/
> >
> >* Community: http://shardingsphere.io/community/
> >
> > = Background =
> >
> > Relational database hardly supports such huge amounts of data any more
> > which has increased rapidly in recent years, but for reason of
> > technique maturity, developers and DBAs still want to use it to
> > persist core data.
> >
> > Sharding-Sphere was open sourced on Github in 2016. At the very
> > beginning, Sharding-Sphere is just a JDBC driver for data sharding
> > (name as Sharding-JDBC) at Dangdang internal framework; now it offers
> > data sharding, distributed transaction and database orchestration.
> > Besides JDBC, proxy to implement MySQL database protocol is also
> > supported at present. Furthermore, our roadmap includes Proxy for
> > PostgreSQL protocol, Sidecar model, data repica and elastic data
> > scalability function as well.
> >
> > Due to the extension of project, we provide proxy model and sidecar
> > model in addition to JDBC model. Therefore, we rename it to
> > Sharding-Sphere by
> > [[https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere/issues/788|a
> > public vote]], which refers to a sharding ecosphere with
> > Sharding-JDBC, Sharding-Proxy and Sharding Sidecar as its three
> > sub-projects.
> >
> > Sharding-JDBC has won the
> > [[http://www.oschina.net/project/top_cn_2016|TOP 20 most popular open
> > source projects in China 2016]].
> >
> > = Rationale =
> >
> > Relational database still plays a very important role on current
> > application system. The maturity of products and surrounding
> > ecosystem, the friendliness of its data query and developers' and
> > DBAs' mastery of it, cannot be completely replaced with other types of
> > database in the near future. However, current relational database
> > cannot support cloud native very well and it is not friendly to
> > distributed system.
> >
> > It is the ultimate goal of Sharding-Sphere, which manages the
> > databases scattering around the system, to make user use distributed
> > databases as simply as using a single one.
> >
> > Without extra cost, Sharding-JDBC directly connects database with Java
> > application to get the best performance.
> >
> > Sharding-Proxy is deployed as a stateless server and supports MySQL
> > protocol at present. In the paper
> > [[https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2016/pavlo-newsql-sigmodrec2016.pdf|What
> ’s
> > Really New with NewSQL?]], three types of NewSQL are introduced, among
> > which Sharding-Proxy is a Transparent Sharding Middleware.
> >
> > Sharding-Sidecar can be understood as a data panel in Service Mesh.
> > The interaction between the application and the database provides a
> > mesh layer. The concept of Database Mesh is similar to Service Mesh,
> > and it focuses on how to connect data access applications to the
> > database. Database Mesh will set up a huge grid system between
> > applications and databases. Applications and databases need be placed
> > in the grid system. They are all objects managed by the meshing layer.
> >
> >

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

2018-11-06 Thread Daniel Shahaf

CC += legal-discuss@ since this really isn't an incubator-specific topic any
more.  The context is precompiled binary artifacts on
https://www.apache.org/dist/.

David Nalley wrote on Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 17:06:50 -0500:
> So let's assume a PMC (or PPMC) goes through the same process with
> binaries in terms of reviewing, voting on, promoting, and publishing
> to the world a binary release on behalf of the PMC and Foundation.
> Binaries are published to the same location that source tar balls are
> - are featured on download pages provided by the ASF. Perhaps even
> with the situation being that people download the binary artifacts
> from ASF resources tens of thousands, or maybe even millions of times
> more frequently than the source tarballs.
> 
> From that scenario I have some questions:
> 
> 1. Would a reasonable person (or jury) suspend disbelief long enough
> to consider our protestations that our 'releases' are source only, and
> that as a Foundation we didn't release, propagate, promote, or
> distribute the binaries in question? A rose by any other name.
> 2. Should the Board be taking an active interest in projects (release
> managers?) who promote and publish their binaries in this manner on
> our hardware?
> 3. Is lack of Board action tantamount to tacit approval of this
> behavior? Can we really claim ignorance?
> 4. Should Infrastructure be actively monitoring and removing binaries
> which find their way to dist.a.o/archive.a.o - especially since our
> header for dist.a.o says that the directories contain releases of
> Apache software?
> 5. Should we be alerting individual release managers that publishing
> convenience binaries exposes them individually to liability?

6. What alternative can we offer to projects that want to distribute binaries?
Can the RM upload precompiled binaries to his https://home.a.o/~availid/ space?
Can the project's download page link to them as the
primary/canonical/recommended binaries?  Can the project's download page link
to the RM's binaries as one alternative among many (compare
https://subversion.apache.org/packages#windows)?

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

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

2018-11-06 Thread David Nalley

On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 9:39 PM Greg Stein  wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 12:25 PM Julian Hyde  wrote:
>
> > Jim, you’re re-iterating the premise of my question. In the context of my
> > question, it doesn’t matter what these things are called. But we need to
> > know how reviewers are to handle them.
> >
> > Since I asked the original question, I have found the following policy[1]:
> >
> > > COMPILED PACKAGES
> > >
> > > The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All
> > > releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
> > > changes to the software being released.
> > >
> > > As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to
> > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY
> > > be distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the
> > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the
> > > source release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the
> > > result of compiling that version of the source code release and its
> > > dependencies.
> >
> > This policy clarifies what these things may contain. I still need
> > clarification on what is the responsibility of a reviewer.
>
>
> It has been repeated several times already. There is no such thing as
> "reviewer" since these are not official releases. So they certainly
> shouldn't be voted upon. They are just some binaries hanging out on our
> server.
>
> I propose:
> >
> > 1. Reviewers have no way to verify the contents of the binaries and
> > therefore they have to trust that the release manager has built them
> > according to the documented release process.
> >
>
> And this is exactly why they are unofficial.
>
> -g

Playing devil's advocate for a moment, and primarily picking on Greg
since he won't take it personally and hopefully will indulge me. :)

So let's assume a PMC (or PPMC) goes through the same process with
binaries in terms of reviewing, voting on, promoting, and publishing
to the world a binary release on behalf of the PMC and Foundation.
Binaries are published to the same location that source tar balls are
- are featured on download pages provided by the ASF. Perhaps even
with the situation being that people download the binary artifacts
from ASF resources tens of thousands, or maybe even millions of times
more frequently than the source tarballs.

>From that scenario I have some questions:

1. Would a reasonable person (or jury) suspend disbelief long enough
to consider our protestations that our 'releases' are source only, and
that as a Foundation we didn't release, propagate, promote, or
distribute the binaries in question? A rose by any other name.
2. Should the Board be taking an active interest in projects (release
managers?) who promote and publish their binaries in this manner on
our hardware?
3. Is lack of Board action tantamount to tacit approval of this
behavior? Can we really claim ignorance?
4. Should Infrastructure be actively monitoring and removing binaries
which find their way to dist.a.o/archive.a.o - especially since our
header for dist.a.o says that the directories contain releases of
Apache software?
5. Should we be alerting individual release managers that publishing
convenience binaries exposes them individually to liability?

To my mind, allowing projects to distribute 'convenience binaries'
from our hardware, in a place we say contains releases, and which is
occasionally consumed in such a way as to dwarf what we call official
releases[1], makes them actions of the Foundation despite our
protestations. Even more so since we haven't claimed DMCA Safe Harbor
protections as a hosting provider rather than as an entity that
publishes its own content.

--David

[1] Cassandra mistakenly pointed people to a binary deb repo that was
running on our TLP boxes - the traffic to that deb repo was
responsible for 15% of the total bandwidth consumed by the Foundation
for the month or so that it ran in that fashion. No small feat.

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

Re: Draft email to member list to try and recruit some new mentors

2018-11-06 Thread justin

Hi,

And sent, looking forward to some responses.

Thanks,
Justin

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

Re: Some early stage questions

2018-11-06 Thread Luciano Resende

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 12:05 PM Jacques Basaldúa  wrote:
>
>
> I have been working really hard on the documentation in the last two months 
> and I am almost done. The current public documentation is very incomplete. 
> Please, allow me to share it with you when I merge the new version, as 
> mentioned, in less than two weeks.
>

Note that at Apache we value community over code, so it might be
better to evangelize/recruit some folks to use/work on your project
instead of trying to make it "complete/done".




-- 
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

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

RE: Some early stage questions

2018-11-06 Thread Jacques Basaldúa

Hi Dave, Nick and everyone,

Thank you very much for the quick answer.

The original project was built by a team and released under an Apache License. 
As originally designed, it has no activity now. For the moment, I am alone in 
the pivoting the code released into a new idea. I am an original author. The 
updated public website will be in github + github pages very soon. In two weeks 
I have the first presentation at an event in Spain were I try to explain why it 
matters to me and that, of course, we need a community to make it happen. I 
will promote it in similar events: C++, R and Python Meetups in Madrid. My 
concern here is: 1. do I meet the requirements or should I wait for, say, one 
year, 2. how to present it to the ASF. Of course, I consider reaching the 
Apache Incubator the number one place to make the project visible and maximize 
the chance of success.

>From what I understand from your replies: It is not impossible to submit a 
>proposal for an incomplete project and neither is it a requirement to have a 
>sponsor. The way to present it is: just share what I have and, if an ASF 
>member wants to champion the project, then I will get advice on how to 
>formalize a proposal for voting.

Is that correct?

I have been working really hard on the documentation in the last two months and 
I am almost done. The current public documentation is very incomplete. Please, 
allow me to share it with you when I merge the new version, as mentioned, in 
less than two weeks.

Thanks again,

Jacques.

-Mensaje original-
De: Nick Kew [mailto:n...@apache.org] 
Enviado el: Monday, November 05, 2018 9:31 PM
Para: general@incubator.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Some early stage questions

> On 5 Nov 2018, at 19:31, Jacques Basaldúa  wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I would like to formulate a proposal to the ASF incubator. After spending 
> some time browsing the website, I still have a few novice questions I wish to 
> share with you.
> 
> 1. https://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html states: "Before starting 
> on the formal proposal, recruit a Champion.", how can I do that?

Ideally you know someone from Apache who has taken an interest in your project.
Or if it relates to an existing Apache project(s), that could be somewhere to 
look.
Failing that, try and interest someone here.  

> 2. I don't have a sponsor. I have been dedicating almost 2000 hours in 2018 
> (on top of my day job) to this project started end of 2016. At that time, the 
> project was developed in a corporation that open sourced it under an Apache 
> License in Dec 2017. As I understand it, the incubator is about building (or 
> failing to build) a community around a project. Does that meet your 
> expectations?

It may do: it depends on your potential for building a community.  Is your 
project visible -
e.g. public repos and website?  Can you show evidence of public interest in it?

Your level of committment there might risk burnout in a few years!

> 3. The project is under refactoring to an ambitious long term goal. I do not 
> have an MVP, but it has good documentation and software engineering practices 
> including: unit testing, static and dynamic analysis tools, building 
> automation, etc. I expect the jury and candidates to be comfortable with 
> unfinished projects and decide on the vision and the code. Does that make 
> sense or is it too early?

That would be matters for your project community.

> I think my questions should be common. If you agree, I volunteer to 
> contribute the answers to the website to help others boarding on the 
> incubator.

That's a Very Good Way to earn goodwill around here, if you come out of the 
process
with a clear vision for better docs.

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

-Mensaje original-
De: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Enviado el: Monday, November 05, 2018 8:59 PM
Para: general@incubator.apache.org
Asunto: Re: Some early stage questions

Hi Jacques,

Welcome to the Apache Incubator.

> On Nov 5, 2018, at 11:31 AM, Jacques Basaldúa  wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I would like to formulate a proposal to the ASF incubator. After spending 
> some time browsing the website, I still have a few novice questions I wish to 
> share with you.
> 
> 1. https://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html states: "Before starting 
> on the formal proposal, recruit a Champion.", how can I do that?

Asking on this email list is one way to do it. A Champion will be someone who 
is an Apache Member and understands how to create the Proposal.

> 
> 2. I don't have a sponsor. I have been dedicating almost 2000 hours in 2018 
> (on top of my day job) to this project started end of 2016. At that time, the 
> project was developed in a corporation that open sourced it under an Apache 
> License in Dec 2017. As

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

2018-11-06 Thread Kevin A. McGrail

I agree.  This is a policy for the IPMC to determine and I think this will
increase inclusion.  We need mentors and of all types.  +1
--
Kevin A. McGrail
VP Fundraising, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171


On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 7:27 AM Shane Curcuru  wrote:

> Great ideas, thanks Justin!
>
> Justin Mclean wrote on 11/6/18 3:20 AM:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it
> says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it
> that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
>
> The IPMC is a PMC just like any other PMC.  How the PMC decides to
> choose new PMC members to recommend for a board ACK is up to the PMC, as
> long as it's documented clearly.
>
> > Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator
> list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
>
> IMO the "ASF Members can request recommendation without vote" is because
> of two factors: experience and oversight.  We (hope) Members have the
> skills as you note as well.  Separately, since the IPMC is overseeing a
> wide range of communities with an eye to inviting them to become an
> official Apache project, we should allow Members to formally join the
> IPMC to help oversee this process, since
>
> ...snip...
> > Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to
> private@ listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on
> them, and there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private
> vote I don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could
> nominate other people who fit into this above group.
>
> +1, having a clear criteria as you list (to ensure it's people who
> really have productively helped, and not just people status-seeking) and
> an explicit call to "this is how you can *ask* to get voted into the
> IPMC" is a great idea.  I agree, we definitely need a larger pool of
> mentors for podlings, and helping committed non-Members be able to do
> this is a great thing.
>
>
> --
>
> - Shane
>   Director & Member
>   The Apache Software Foundation
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

2018-11-06 Thread Kenneth Knowles

I like this. I had the (apparently accurate) impression that ASF membership
was the usual route to podling mentorship. I'm very interested in
mentorship generally and ways I can help out ASF - so they might someday
intersect in the formal role of podling mentor. It is nice to see a path
that is not gated on ASF membership.

Kenn

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 12:20 AM Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it
> says nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it
> that the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
>
> Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator
> list. (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
>
> In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a
> project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating
> process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers and
> PMC members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF members.
> They may not have as much experience but shovel at least know the basics.
>
> Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to
> determine and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors is
> probably small (but still significant in numbers).
>
> So I propose this:
>
> If someone has done several of the following:
> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> - has been a release manager
> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> - has reviewed and voted on releases
> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
>
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@
> listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and
> there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I
> don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate
> other people who fit into this above group.
>
> I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors, rather
> than just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue with the
> later (and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of catching any
> issues with releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m trying to
> solve with this proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and will need
> even more as ASF scales up.
>
> The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that people
> can bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC, rather
> than having the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated projects
> who then may or may not want to be IPMC members.
>
> We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people
> who request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors observing
> and/ or helping them.
>
> What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not?
> Could it work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> 1.
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Champion Role is Only to Get a Podling Started

2018-11-06 Thread Roman Shaposhnik

On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 11:25 AM Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone, but especially mentors.
>
> I saw this email from a mentor on the Airflow dev list: [1]
>
> "The big list that *has* to be filled out and correct is here: 
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/airflow.html 
>  This is usually done by 
> the Champion …"
>
> This is not correct. This work is to be done by Mentors maintaining the 
> podling status file.
>
> The PPMC should be handling the Maturity Model and Graduation Resolution with 
> Mentor’s help as needed.
>
> While the Champion may become a Mentor the Champion role finishes once the 
> podling is has been onboard to the Incubator.

+1. That's been my understanding as well.

Thanks,
Roman.

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

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread Bruno Mahé


+1 (non-binding)


Thanks,

Bruno

On 11/5/18 10:41 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:

Hi!

on behalf of Sharding-Sphere community, I'd like to call
a VOTE to accept it into the Apache Incubator. The full
proposal is available on the wiki:
 https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ShardingSphereProposal
and it is also attached below for your convenience.

Please cast your vote:

   [ ] +1, bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator
   [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
   [ ] -1, do not bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator, because...

The vote will open at least for 72 hours.

Thanks,
Roman.

= Abstract =
Sharding-Sphere is an ecosystem of transparent distributed database
middleware, focusing on data sharding, distributed transaction and
database orchestration. It provides maximum compatibility for
applications through Sharding-JDBC (a driver to implement JDBC) or
Sharding-Proxy (a proxy to implement database protocol).

= Proposal =
With a large number of end users, Sharding-Sphere has a fairly huge
community in China. It is also widely adopted by many
[[http://shardingsphere.io/community/en/company/|companies and
organizations]] as a solution to process their massive amounts of
data.

We believe that bringing Sharding-Sphere into Apache Software
Foundation could advance development of a stronger and more diverse
open source community.

Dangdang submits this proposal to donate Sharding-Sphere's source
codes and all related documentations to Apache Software Foundation.
The codes are already under Apache License Version 2.0.

   * Code base: https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere

   * Web site: http://shardingsphere.io/

   * Documentations: http://shardingsphere.io/document/current/

   * Community: http://shardingsphere.io/community/

= Background =

Relational database hardly supports such huge amounts of data any more
which has increased rapidly in recent years, but for reason of
technique maturity, developers and DBAs still want to use it to
persist core data.

Sharding-Sphere was open sourced on Github in 2016. At the very
beginning, Sharding-Sphere is just a JDBC driver for data sharding
(name as Sharding-JDBC) at Dangdang internal framework; now it offers
data sharding, distributed transaction and database orchestration.
Besides JDBC, proxy to implement MySQL database protocol is also
supported at present. Furthermore, our roadmap includes Proxy for
PostgreSQL protocol, Sidecar model, data repica and elastic data
scalability function as well.

Due to the extension of project, we provide proxy model and sidecar
model in addition to JDBC model. Therefore, we rename it to
Sharding-Sphere by
[[https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere/issues/788|a
public vote]], which refers to a sharding ecosphere with
Sharding-JDBC, Sharding-Proxy and Sharding Sidecar as its three
sub-projects.

Sharding-JDBC has won the
[[http://www.oschina.net/project/top_cn_2016|TOP 20 most popular open
source projects in China 2016]].

= Rationale =

Relational database still plays a very important role on current
application system. The maturity of products and surrounding
ecosystem, the friendliness of its data query and developers' and
DBAs' mastery of it, cannot be completely replaced with other types of
database in the near future. However, current relational database
cannot support cloud native very well and it is not friendly to
distributed system.

It is the ultimate goal of Sharding-Sphere, which manages the
databases scattering around the system, to make user use distributed
databases as simply as using a single one.

Without extra cost, Sharding-JDBC directly connects database with Java
application to get the best performance.

Sharding-Proxy is deployed as a stateless server and supports MySQL
protocol at present. In the paper
[[https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2016/pavlo-newsql-sigmodrec2016.pdf|What’s
Really New with NewSQL?]], three types of NewSQL are introduced, among
which Sharding-Proxy is a Transparent Sharding Middleware.

Sharding-Sidecar can be understood as a data panel in Service Mesh.
The interaction between the application and the database provides a
mesh layer. The concept of Database Mesh is similar to Service Mesh,
and it focuses on how to connect data access applications to the
database. Database Mesh will set up a huge grid system between
applications and databases. Applications and databases need be placed
in the grid system. They are all objects managed by the meshing layer.

= Current Status =
== Meritocracy ==
Sharding-Sphere was incubated at Dangdang in 2015 and open sourced on
GitHub in 2016. In 2017, Jingdong recognized its value and determined
to sponsor this project. Sharding-Sphere has contributors and users
from many companies; we have set up the PMC Team and Committer Team.
New contributors are guided and reviewed by existed PMC members. When
they are ready, PMC will start a vote to promote him/her to become a
member of PMC or Committer Team. See the details See the details

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread Matt Sicker

+1 (binding)

On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 at 06:38, Willem Jiang  wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> Willem Jiang
>
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 2:41 PM Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > on behalf of Sharding-Sphere community, I'd like to call
> > a VOTE to accept it into the Apache Incubator. The full
> > proposal is available on the wiki:
> > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ShardingSphereProposal
> > and it is also attached below for your convenience.
> >
> > Please cast your vote:
> >
> >   [ ] +1, bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator
> >   [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> >   [ ] -1, do not bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator, because...
> >
> > The vote will open at least for 72 hours.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
> > = Abstract =
> > Sharding-Sphere is an ecosystem of transparent distributed database
> > middleware, focusing on data sharding, distributed transaction and
> > database orchestration. It provides maximum compatibility for
> > applications through Sharding-JDBC (a driver to implement JDBC) or
> > Sharding-Proxy (a proxy to implement database protocol).
> >
> > = Proposal =
> > With a large number of end users, Sharding-Sphere has a fairly huge
> > community in China. It is also widely adopted by many
> > [[http://shardingsphere.io/community/en/company/|companies and
> > organizations]] as a solution to process their massive amounts of
> > data.
> >
> > We believe that bringing Sharding-Sphere into Apache Software
> > Foundation could advance development of a stronger and more diverse
> > open source community.
> >
> > Dangdang submits this proposal to donate Sharding-Sphere's source
> > codes and all related documentations to Apache Software Foundation.
> > The codes are already under Apache License Version 2.0.
> >
> >   * Code base: https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere
> >
> >   * Web site: http://shardingsphere.io/
> >
> >   * Documentations: http://shardingsphere.io/document/current/
> >
> >   * Community: http://shardingsphere.io/community/
> >
> > = Background =
> >
> > Relational database hardly supports such huge amounts of data any more
> > which has increased rapidly in recent years, but for reason of
> > technique maturity, developers and DBAs still want to use it to
> > persist core data.
> >
> > Sharding-Sphere was open sourced on Github in 2016. At the very
> > beginning, Sharding-Sphere is just a JDBC driver for data sharding
> > (name as Sharding-JDBC) at Dangdang internal framework; now it offers
> > data sharding, distributed transaction and database orchestration.
> > Besides JDBC, proxy to implement MySQL database protocol is also
> > supported at present. Furthermore, our roadmap includes Proxy for
> > PostgreSQL protocol, Sidecar model, data repica and elastic data
> > scalability function as well.
> >
> > Due to the extension of project, we provide proxy model and sidecar
> > model in addition to JDBC model. Therefore, we rename it to
> > Sharding-Sphere by
> > [[https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere/issues/788|a
> > public vote]], which refers to a sharding ecosphere with
> > Sharding-JDBC, Sharding-Proxy and Sharding Sidecar as its three
> > sub-projects.
> >
> > Sharding-JDBC has won the
> > [[http://www.oschina.net/project/top_cn_2016|TOP 20 most popular open
> > source projects in China 2016]].
> >
> > = Rationale =
> >
> > Relational database still plays a very important role on current
> > application system. The maturity of products and surrounding
> > ecosystem, the friendliness of its data query and developers' and
> > DBAs' mastery of it, cannot be completely replaced with other types of
> > database in the near future. However, current relational database
> > cannot support cloud native very well and it is not friendly to
> > distributed system.
> >
> > It is the ultimate goal of Sharding-Sphere, which manages the
> > databases scattering around the system, to make user use distributed
> > databases as simply as using a single one.
> >
> > Without extra cost, Sharding-JDBC directly connects database with Java
> > application to get the best performance.
> >
> > Sharding-Proxy is deployed as a stateless server and supports MySQL
> > protocol at present. In the paper
> > [[https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2016/pavlo-newsql-sigmodrec2016.pdf|What
> ’s
> > Really New with NewSQL?]], three types of NewSQL are introduced, among
> > which Sharding-Proxy is a Transparent Sharding Middleware.
> >
> > Sharding-Sidecar can be understood as a data panel in Service Mesh.
> > The interaction between the application and the database provides a
> > mesh layer. The concept of Database Mesh is similar to Service Mesh,
> > and it focuses on how to connect data access applications to the
> > database. Database Mesh will set up a huge grid system between
> > applications and databases. Applications and databases need be placed
> > in the grid system. They are all objects managed by the meshing layer.
> >
> >

Re: Restarting an IPMC?

2018-11-06 Thread Luciano Resende

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 12:26 AM Justin Mclean  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Good to see that the honest (stark even) podling report got several people 
> expressing interest in the project.
>
> >  1.  Is there anyone here on this list, willing to contribute as 
> > Committer/PPMC or even as Mentor?
>
> I’m happy to continue as a mentor, the project currently has 2 mentors. If no 
> one steps up, you Chris as a recent IPMC member could be a mentor. Or is that 
> a bit too weird?

Same here.



-- 
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

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

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread Willem Jiang

+1 (binding)

Willem Jiang

Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 2:41 PM Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> on behalf of Sharding-Sphere community, I'd like to call
> a VOTE to accept it into the Apache Incubator. The full
> proposal is available on the wiki:
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ShardingSphereProposal
> and it is also attached below for your convenience.
>
> Please cast your vote:
>
>   [ ] +1, bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator
>   [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>   [ ] -1, do not bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator, because...
>
> The vote will open at least for 72 hours.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> = Abstract =
> Sharding-Sphere is an ecosystem of transparent distributed database
> middleware, focusing on data sharding, distributed transaction and
> database orchestration. It provides maximum compatibility for
> applications through Sharding-JDBC (a driver to implement JDBC) or
> Sharding-Proxy (a proxy to implement database protocol).
>
> = Proposal =
> With a large number of end users, Sharding-Sphere has a fairly huge
> community in China. It is also widely adopted by many
> [[http://shardingsphere.io/community/en/company/|companies and
> organizations]] as a solution to process their massive amounts of
> data.
>
> We believe that bringing Sharding-Sphere into Apache Software
> Foundation could advance development of a stronger and more diverse
> open source community.
>
> Dangdang submits this proposal to donate Sharding-Sphere's source
> codes and all related documentations to Apache Software Foundation.
> The codes are already under Apache License Version 2.0.
>
>   * Code base: https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere
>
>   * Web site: http://shardingsphere.io/
>
>   * Documentations: http://shardingsphere.io/document/current/
>
>   * Community: http://shardingsphere.io/community/
>
> = Background =
>
> Relational database hardly supports such huge amounts of data any more
> which has increased rapidly in recent years, but for reason of
> technique maturity, developers and DBAs still want to use it to
> persist core data.
>
> Sharding-Sphere was open sourced on Github in 2016. At the very
> beginning, Sharding-Sphere is just a JDBC driver for data sharding
> (name as Sharding-JDBC) at Dangdang internal framework; now it offers
> data sharding, distributed transaction and database orchestration.
> Besides JDBC, proxy to implement MySQL database protocol is also
> supported at present. Furthermore, our roadmap includes Proxy for
> PostgreSQL protocol, Sidecar model, data repica and elastic data
> scalability function as well.
>
> Due to the extension of project, we provide proxy model and sidecar
> model in addition to JDBC model. Therefore, we rename it to
> Sharding-Sphere by
> [[https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere/issues/788|a
> public vote]], which refers to a sharding ecosphere with
> Sharding-JDBC, Sharding-Proxy and Sharding Sidecar as its three
> sub-projects.
>
> Sharding-JDBC has won the
> [[http://www.oschina.net/project/top_cn_2016|TOP 20 most popular open
> source projects in China 2016]].
>
> = Rationale =
>
> Relational database still plays a very important role on current
> application system. The maturity of products and surrounding
> ecosystem, the friendliness of its data query and developers' and
> DBAs' mastery of it, cannot be completely replaced with other types of
> database in the near future. However, current relational database
> cannot support cloud native very well and it is not friendly to
> distributed system.
>
> It is the ultimate goal of Sharding-Sphere, which manages the
> databases scattering around the system, to make user use distributed
> databases as simply as using a single one.
>
> Without extra cost, Sharding-JDBC directly connects database with Java
> application to get the best performance.
>
> Sharding-Proxy is deployed as a stateless server and supports MySQL
> protocol at present. In the paper
> [[https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2016/pavlo-newsql-sigmodrec2016.pdf|What’s
> Really New with NewSQL?]], three types of NewSQL are introduced, among
> which Sharding-Proxy is a Transparent Sharding Middleware.
>
> Sharding-Sidecar can be understood as a data panel in Service Mesh.
> The interaction between the application and the database provides a
> mesh layer. The concept of Database Mesh is similar to Service Mesh,
> and it focuses on how to connect data access applications to the
> database. Database Mesh will set up a huge grid system between
> applications and databases. Applications and databases need be placed
> in the grid system. They are all objects managed by the meshing layer.
>
> = Current Status =
> == Meritocracy ==
> Sharding-Sphere was incubated at Dangdang in 2015 and open sourced on
> GitHub in 2016. In 2017, Jingdong recognized its value and determined
> to sponsor this project. Sharding-Sphere has contributors and users
> from many companies; we have set up the PMC

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

2018-11-06 Thread Shane Curcuru

Great ideas, thanks Justin!

Justin Mclean wrote on 11/6/18 3:20 AM:
> Hi,
> 
> I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it says 
> nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it that 
> the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.

The IPMC is a PMC just like any other PMC.  How the PMC decides to
choose new PMC members to recommend for a board ACK is up to the PMC, as
long as it's documented clearly.

> Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF 
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came 
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator list. 
> (If anyone knows please point me to it.)

IMO the "ASF Members can request recommendation without vote" is because
of two factors: experience and oversight.  We (hope) Members have the
skills as you note as well.  Separately, since the IPMC is overseeing a
wide range of communities with an eye to inviting them to become an
official Apache project, we should allow Members to formally join the
IPMC to help oversee this process, since

...snip...
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@ 
> listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and 
> there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I 
> don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate 
> other people who fit into this above group.

+1, having a clear criteria as you list (to ensure it's people who
really have productively helped, and not just people status-seeking) and
an explicit call to "this is how you can *ask* to get voted into the
IPMC" is a great idea.  I agree, we definitely need a larger pool of
mentors for podlings, and helping committed non-Members be able to do
this is a great thing.


-- 

- Shane
  Director & Member
  The Apache Software Foundation

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

Re: Voting in new IPMC members

2018-11-06 Thread justin

Hi,

For instance [1] which states:
"For committership, that is typical. Most PMCs allow a veto for adding new 
members to the PMC.”

Not to single an individual out but that was the shortest concise statement I 
could fine. (But given it was 2013 their views may of changed since then).

Justin

1. 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/406150947529308214f1ab80b42ed670a71df0537c1a860c1da2f82f@1380817899@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Voting in new IPMC members

HI,

> That's not correct, its not "no -1s" - quoting [2]:
> 
>> Consensus approval' refers to a vote (sense 1) which has completed with at 
>> least three
>> binding +1 votes and no vetos.
> 
> It says "no vetos", not "no -1s"
> 
> And as per [0] vetoes only apply to code changes, so that definition
> of "consensus approval" cannot IMO apply to anything other than code
> changes.

If you read the thread I pointed to -1 are vetos on committer and PMC members, 
or rather many old ASF members think that is the case, I’m not sure what else I 
can say other than that. It would be good if this was clarified (and the 
documentation corrected) as I know it’s caused issues on a number of occasions.

Perhaps discuss/branch the board discussion on default guidelines to discuss 
this?

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

Re: Voting in new IPMC members

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 10:35 AM Justin Mclean  wrote:
> I think some of this is confusion between what consensus means and
> consensus voting mean (or more correctly consensus approval) [2] (i.e. 3+1s 
> and no -1’s.)

That's not correct, its not "no -1s" - quoting [2]:

> Consensus approval' refers to a vote (sense 1) which has completed with at 
> least three
> binding +1 votes and no vetos.

It says "no vetos", not "no -1s"

And as per [0] vetoes only apply to code changes, so that definition
of "consensus approval" cannot IMO apply to anything other than code
changes.

I am very attached to the "vetoes apply only to code changes" rule,
not willing to let that change in any way.

That's just my opinion but I think changing that would be a big
mistake as it allows for deadlocks.

Even though I'm also very attached to paying attention to all -1s,
*from a community point of view*, while recognizing that from a formal
point of view they are not vetoes if it's not about code changes.

-Bertrand

[0] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
[1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ConsensusApproval

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

Re: Restarting an IPMC?

Hi,

> Well I guess then I'll simply step up as third mentor on Edgent. 
> Do I formally have to do anything for this?

Ask the PPMC if they are willing to take you on as a mentor would be the best 
way.

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

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

2018-11-06 Thread Sheng Wu

Hi Justin

Very interesting proposal. And I like it, also willing to request for that :)

>From my experience, several projects have invited me or involved me in, such 
>as Zipkin(Incubating) and IoTDB(In Incubator discussion). But because I can't 
>be podling project mentor, based on Apache member rule you mentioned, I just 
>show up as a contributor. If I could be the mentor for these projects, will be 
>great.

Anyway, glad to see we have new option to solve `not enough mentor` issue.

Thanks Justin.

Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking


On 2018/11/06 08:20:18, Justin Mclean  wrote: 
> Hi,
> 
> I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it says 
> nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it that 
> the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.
> 
> Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF 
> member can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came 
> from and wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator list. 
> (If anyone knows please point me to it.)
> 
> In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a 
> project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating 
> process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers and 
> PMC members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF members. They 
> may not have as much experience but shovel at least know the basics.
> 
> Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to determine 
> and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors is probably 
> small (but still significant in numbers).
> 
> So I propose this:
> 
> If someone has done several of the following:
> - has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
> - has been a release manager
> - has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
> - has reviewed and voted on releases
> - has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members
> 
> Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@ 
> listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and 
> there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I 
> don’t think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate 
> other people who fit into this above group.
> 
> I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors, rather 
> than just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue with the 
> later (and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of catching any 
> issues with releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m trying to 
> solve with this proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and will need 
> even more as ASF scales up.
> 
> The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that people 
> can bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC, rather than 
> having the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated projects who 
> then may or may not want to be IPMC members.
> 
> We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people who 
> request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors observing and/ 
> or helping them.
> 
> What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not? Could 
> it work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 
> 
> 1. 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 

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

Re: Voting in new IPMC members

Hi,

> To me the ultimate reference is
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html - decisions are made by
> consensus (*) which can be expressed by a majority vote with a least
> three +1s, and vetoes are only valid for code changes.

That page has a few issues IMO, for starters it not clear what "procedural 
issue” actually are or if it includes voting in PMC/committers or not. This has 
been discussed many times and changes suggested to be made to that page but 
none made. I was going to suggest some after discussion on the default 
guidelines thread on the board list.

Other pages [1] list consensus approval, as do a lot of project guidelines, 
including probably the HTTP one which states "approved by consensus of the 
active Apache PMC members”. I think some of this is confusion between what 
consensus means and consensus voting mean (or more correctly consensus 
approval) [2] (i.e. 3+1s and no -1’s.)

But perhaps this old (and perhaps familiar?) thread will help [3], particular 
this email [4] and the solution from the email [5] :-) There are other threads 
(newer and older) that come to the same conclusion.

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://community.apache.org/newcommitter.html#discussion
2. https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#ConsensusApproval
3. 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/3c1a4887cc1b31bb85fcdbd0481d9f70895738740610aace15a7c9a3@1380595285@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
4. 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8a2136812c31e7d05a4b1b8d07481e25438fbda5c30138770a072705@1380737476@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
5. 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e7e1a40246df6e40188d06818ee296c8cd7a29002f5af9164b6a64d6@1380815332@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 10:02 AM Sheng Wu  wrote:
> ...The proposal and vote are here
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/88beebeec1aec8c32d331a3957b9eaec5aeee3e4e1bb23664731d048@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E

Oops sorry, it landed in my spam folder for some reason - sorry for the noise!

-Bertrand

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

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread Gosling Von

+1

Von Gosling

> 在 2018年11月6日，下午2:41，Roman Shaposhnik  写道：
> 
> Hi!
> 
> on behalf of Sharding-Sphere community, I'd like to call
> a VOTE to accept it into the Apache Incubator. The full
> proposal is available on the wiki:
>https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ShardingSphereProposal
> and it is also attached below for your convenience.
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
>  [ ] +1, bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator
>  [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>  [ ] -1, do not bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator, because...
> 
> The vote will open at least for 72 hours.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.
> 
> = Abstract =
> Sharding-Sphere is an ecosystem of transparent distributed database
> middleware, focusing on data sharding, distributed transaction and
> database orchestration. It provides maximum compatibility for
> applications through Sharding-JDBC (a driver to implement JDBC) or
> Sharding-Proxy (a proxy to implement database protocol).
> 
> = Proposal =
> With a large number of end users, Sharding-Sphere has a fairly huge
> community in China. It is also widely adopted by many
> [[http://shardingsphere.io/community/en/company/|companies and
> organizations]] as a solution to process their massive amounts of
> data.
> 
> We believe that bringing Sharding-Sphere into Apache Software
> Foundation could advance development of a stronger and more diverse
> open source community.
> 
> Dangdang submits this proposal to donate Sharding-Sphere's source
> codes and all related documentations to Apache Software Foundation.
> The codes are already under Apache License Version 2.0.
> 
>  * Code base: https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere
> 
>  * Web site: http://shardingsphere.io/
> 
>  * Documentations: http://shardingsphere.io/document/current/
> 
>  * Community: http://shardingsphere.io/community/
> 
> = Background =
> 
> Relational database hardly supports such huge amounts of data any more
> which has increased rapidly in recent years, but for reason of
> technique maturity, developers and DBAs still want to use it to
> persist core data.
> 
> Sharding-Sphere was open sourced on Github in 2016. At the very
> beginning, Sharding-Sphere is just a JDBC driver for data sharding
> (name as Sharding-JDBC) at Dangdang internal framework; now it offers
> data sharding, distributed transaction and database orchestration.
> Besides JDBC, proxy to implement MySQL database protocol is also
> supported at present. Furthermore, our roadmap includes Proxy for
> PostgreSQL protocol, Sidecar model, data repica and elastic data
> scalability function as well.
> 
> Due to the extension of project, we provide proxy model and sidecar
> model in addition to JDBC model. Therefore, we rename it to
> Sharding-Sphere by
> [[https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere/issues/788|a
> public vote]], which refers to a sharding ecosphere with
> Sharding-JDBC, Sharding-Proxy and Sharding Sidecar as its three
> sub-projects.
> 
> Sharding-JDBC has won the
> [[http://www.oschina.net/project/top_cn_2016|TOP 20 most popular open
> source projects in China 2016]].
> 
> = Rationale =
> 
> Relational database still plays a very important role on current
> application system. The maturity of products and surrounding
> ecosystem, the friendliness of its data query and developers' and
> DBAs' mastery of it, cannot be completely replaced with other types of
> database in the near future. However, current relational database
> cannot support cloud native very well and it is not friendly to
> distributed system.
> 
> It is the ultimate goal of Sharding-Sphere, which manages the
> databases scattering around the system, to make user use distributed
> databases as simply as using a single one.
> 
> Without extra cost, Sharding-JDBC directly connects database with Java
> application to get the best performance.
> 
> Sharding-Proxy is deployed as a stateless server and supports MySQL
> protocol at present. In the paper
> [[https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2016/pavlo-newsql-sigmodrec2016.pdf|What’s
> Really New with NewSQL?]], three types of NewSQL are introduced, among
> which Sharding-Proxy is a Transparent Sharding Middleware.
> 
> Sharding-Sidecar can be understood as a data panel in Service Mesh.
> The interaction between the application and the database provides a
> mesh layer. The concept of Database Mesh is similar to Service Mesh,
> and it focuses on how to connect data access applications to the
> database. Database Mesh will set up a huge grid system between
> applications and databases. Applications and databases need be placed
> in the grid system. They are all objects managed by the meshing layer.
> 
> = Current Status =
> == Meritocracy ==
> Sharding-Sphere was incubated at Dangdang in 2015 and open sourced on
> GitHub in 2016. In 2017, Jingdong recognized its value and determined
> to sponsor this project. Sharding-Sphere has contributors and users
> from many companies; we have set up the PMC Team and Committer Team.
> New contributors

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread Xin Wang

+1 no binding

Sheng Wu  于2018年11月6日周二 下午5:09写道：

> +1 no binding
>
> Sheng Wu
> Apache SkyWalking
>
> On 2018/11/06 06:41:08, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > on behalf of Sharding-Sphere community, I'd like to call
> > a VOTE to accept it into the Apache Incubator. The full
> > proposal is available on the wiki:
> > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ShardingSphereProposal
> > and it is also attached below for your convenience.
> >
> > Please cast your vote:
> >
> >   [ ] +1, bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator
> >   [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> >   [ ] -1, do not bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator, because...
> >
> > The vote will open at least for 72 hours.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
> > = Abstract =
> > Sharding-Sphere is an ecosystem of transparent distributed database
> > middleware, focusing on data sharding, distributed transaction and
> > database orchestration. It provides maximum compatibility for
> > applications through Sharding-JDBC (a driver to implement JDBC) or
> > Sharding-Proxy (a proxy to implement database protocol).
> >
> > = Proposal =
> > With a large number of end users, Sharding-Sphere has a fairly huge
> > community in China. It is also widely adopted by many
> > [[http://shardingsphere.io/community/en/company/|companies and
> > organizations]] as a solution to process their massive amounts of
> > data.
> >
> > We believe that bringing Sharding-Sphere into Apache Software
> > Foundation could advance development of a stronger and more diverse
> > open source community.
> >
> > Dangdang submits this proposal to donate Sharding-Sphere's source
> > codes and all related documentations to Apache Software Foundation.
> > The codes are already under Apache License Version 2.0.
> >
> >   * Code base: https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere
> >
> >   * Web site: http://shardingsphere.io/
> >
> >   * Documentations: http://shardingsphere.io/document/current/
> >
> >   * Community: http://shardingsphere.io/community/
> >
> > = Background =
> >
> > Relational database hardly supports such huge amounts of data any more
> > which has increased rapidly in recent years, but for reason of
> > technique maturity, developers and DBAs still want to use it to
> > persist core data.
> >
> > Sharding-Sphere was open sourced on Github in 2016. At the very
> > beginning, Sharding-Sphere is just a JDBC driver for data sharding
> > (name as Sharding-JDBC) at Dangdang internal framework; now it offers
> > data sharding, distributed transaction and database orchestration.
> > Besides JDBC, proxy to implement MySQL database protocol is also
> > supported at present. Furthermore, our roadmap includes Proxy for
> > PostgreSQL protocol, Sidecar model, data repica and elastic data
> > scalability function as well.
> >
> > Due to the extension of project, we provide proxy model and sidecar
> > model in addition to JDBC model. Therefore, we rename it to
> > Sharding-Sphere by
> > [[https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere/issues/788|a
> > public vote]], which refers to a sharding ecosphere with
> > Sharding-JDBC, Sharding-Proxy and Sharding Sidecar as its three
> > sub-projects.
> >
> > Sharding-JDBC has won the
> > [[http://www.oschina.net/project/top_cn_2016|TOP 20 most popular open
> > source projects in China 2016]].
> >
> > = Rationale =
> >
> > Relational database still plays a very important role on current
> > application system. The maturity of products and surrounding
> > ecosystem, the friendliness of its data query and developers' and
> > DBAs' mastery of it, cannot be completely replaced with other types of
> > database in the near future. However, current relational database
> > cannot support cloud native very well and it is not friendly to
> > distributed system.
> >
> > It is the ultimate goal of Sharding-Sphere, which manages the
> > databases scattering around the system, to make user use distributed
> > databases as simply as using a single one.
> >
> > Without extra cost, Sharding-JDBC directly connects database with Java
> > application to get the best performance.
> >
> > Sharding-Proxy is deployed as a stateless server and supports MySQL
> > protocol at present. In the paper
> > [[https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2016/pavlo-newsql-sigmodrec2016.pdf|What
> ’s
> > Really New with NewSQL?]], three types of NewSQL are introduced, among
> > which Sharding-Proxy is a Transparent Sharding Middleware.
> >
> > Sharding-Sidecar can be understood as a data panel in Service Mesh.
> > The interaction between the application and the database provides a
> > mesh layer. The concept of Database Mesh is similar to Service Mesh,
> > and it focuses on how to connect data access applications to the
> > database. Database Mesh will set up a huge grid system between
> > applications and databases. Applications and databases need be placed
> > in the grid system. They are all objects managed by the meshing layer.
> >
> > = Current Status =
> > == Meritocracy ==
> >

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread Sheng Wu

+1 no binding

Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking

On 2018/11/06 06:41:08, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote: 
> Hi!
> 
> on behalf of Sharding-Sphere community, I'd like to call
> a VOTE to accept it into the Apache Incubator. The full
> proposal is available on the wiki:
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ShardingSphereProposal
> and it is also attached below for your convenience.
> 
> Please cast your vote:
> 
>   [ ] +1, bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator
>   [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>   [ ] -1, do not bring Sharding-Sphere into Incubator, because...
> 
> The vote will open at least for 72 hours.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.
> 
> = Abstract =
> Sharding-Sphere is an ecosystem of transparent distributed database
> middleware, focusing on data sharding, distributed transaction and
> database orchestration. It provides maximum compatibility for
> applications through Sharding-JDBC (a driver to implement JDBC) or
> Sharding-Proxy (a proxy to implement database protocol).
> 
> = Proposal =
> With a large number of end users, Sharding-Sphere has a fairly huge
> community in China. It is also widely adopted by many
> [[http://shardingsphere.io/community/en/company/|companies and
> organizations]] as a solution to process their massive amounts of
> data.
> 
> We believe that bringing Sharding-Sphere into Apache Software
> Foundation could advance development of a stronger and more diverse
> open source community.
> 
> Dangdang submits this proposal to donate Sharding-Sphere's source
> codes and all related documentations to Apache Software Foundation.
> The codes are already under Apache License Version 2.0.
> 
>   * Code base: https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere
> 
>   * Web site: http://shardingsphere.io/
> 
>   * Documentations: http://shardingsphere.io/document/current/
> 
>   * Community: http://shardingsphere.io/community/
> 
> = Background =
> 
> Relational database hardly supports such huge amounts of data any more
> which has increased rapidly in recent years, but for reason of
> technique maturity, developers and DBAs still want to use it to
> persist core data.
> 
> Sharding-Sphere was open sourced on Github in 2016. At the very
> beginning, Sharding-Sphere is just a JDBC driver for data sharding
> (name as Sharding-JDBC) at Dangdang internal framework; now it offers
> data sharding, distributed transaction and database orchestration.
> Besides JDBC, proxy to implement MySQL database protocol is also
> supported at present. Furthermore, our roadmap includes Proxy for
> PostgreSQL protocol, Sidecar model, data repica and elastic data
> scalability function as well.
> 
> Due to the extension of project, we provide proxy model and sidecar
> model in addition to JDBC model. Therefore, we rename it to
> Sharding-Sphere by
> [[https://github.com/sharding-sphere/sharding-sphere/issues/788|a
> public vote]], which refers to a sharding ecosphere with
> Sharding-JDBC, Sharding-Proxy and Sharding Sidecar as its three
> sub-projects.
> 
> Sharding-JDBC has won the
> [[http://www.oschina.net/project/top_cn_2016|TOP 20 most popular open
> source projects in China 2016]].
> 
> = Rationale =
> 
> Relational database still plays a very important role on current
> application system. The maturity of products and surrounding
> ecosystem, the friendliness of its data query and developers' and
> DBAs' mastery of it, cannot be completely replaced with other types of
> database in the near future. However, current relational database
> cannot support cloud native very well and it is not friendly to
> distributed system.
> 
> It is the ultimate goal of Sharding-Sphere, which manages the
> databases scattering around the system, to make user use distributed
> databases as simply as using a single one.
> 
> Without extra cost, Sharding-JDBC directly connects database with Java
> application to get the best performance.
> 
> Sharding-Proxy is deployed as a stateless server and supports MySQL
> protocol at present. In the paper
> [[https://db.cs.cmu.edu/papers/2016/pavlo-newsql-sigmodrec2016.pdf|What’s
> Really New with NewSQL?]], three types of NewSQL are introduced, among
> which Sharding-Proxy is a Transparent Sharding Middleware.
> 
> Sharding-Sidecar can be understood as a data panel in Service Mesh.
> The interaction between the application and the database provides a
> mesh layer. The concept of Database Mesh is similar to Service Mesh,
> and it focuses on how to connect data access applications to the
> database. Database Mesh will set up a huge grid system between
> applications and databases. Applications and databases need be placed
> in the grid system. They are all objects managed by the meshing layer.
> 
> = Current Status =
> == Meritocracy ==
> Sharding-Sphere was incubated at Dangdang in 2015 and open sourced on
> GitHub in 2016. In 2017, Jingdong recognized its value and determined
> to sponsor this project. Sharding-Sphere has contributors and users
> from many companies; we have set up the PMC Team

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

2018-11-06 Thread Sheng Wu

Hi Bertrand

The proposal and vote are here
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/88beebeec1aec8c32d331a3957b9eaec5aeee3e4e1bb23664731d048@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E

I think just Justin's reply didn't include them.

Sheng Wu 

On 2018/11/06 08:50:03, Bertrand Delacretaz  wrote: 
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:40 AM Justin Mclean  wrote:
> > +1 (binding)...
> 
> Where's the proposal that you are voting upon?
> 
> In general, such votes link to a wiki proposal and copy it on the vote
> thread for clarity.
> 
> -Bertrand
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 

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

Re: Restarting an IPMC?

Well I guess then I'll simply step up as third mentor on Edgent. 
Do I formally have to do anything for this?

Chris

Am 06.11.18, 09:26 schrieb "Justin Mclean" :

Hi,

Good to see that the honest (stark even) podling report got several people 
expressing interest in the project.

>  1.  Is there anyone here on this list, willing to contribute as 
Committer/PPMC or even as Mentor?

I’m happy to continue as a mentor, the project currently has 2 mentors. If 
no one steps up, you Chris as a recent IPMC member could be a mentor. Or is 
that a bit too weird?

>  2.  Is it possible to sort of reset a podling IPMC and start with a new 
set of people?

The existing PPMC would need to vote new people in, I think you have enough 
active PPMC members (just) to do that.

>  3.  Should we retire, continue outside and come back as soon as we have 
a new little community?

That is also an option for the PPM to consider.

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




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

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:40 AM Justin Mclean  wrote:
> +1 (binding)...

Where's the proposal that you are voting upon?

In general, such votes link to a wiki proposal and copy it on the vote
thread for clarity.

-Bertrand

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

Re: Voting in new IPMC members

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:39 AM Justin Mclean  wrote:
> ...From my reading of policy and many many discussions on mailing lists, it 
> seem
> that consensus approval not majority approval is the standard way...

To me the ultimate reference is
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html - decisions are made by
consensus (*) which can be expressed by a majority vote with a least
three +1s, and vetoes are only valid for code changes.

Do you see that differently?

-Bertrand

(*) consensus being defined as "widespread agreement among people with
decision power", as opposed to unanimity - because the latter might
block progress

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

Re: [VOTE] Sharding-Sphere incubation proposal

+1 (binding)

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

Re: Voting in new IPMC members

Hi,

> I'm in favor of removing that clause and operating in the standard way with 
> majority votes.

From my reading of policy and many many discussions on mailing lists, it seem 
that consensus approval not majority approval is the standard way. Although 
there is some confusion on this, and different project do operate under 
different rules.

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

Re: Restarting an IPMC?

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:32 AM Christofer Dutz
 wrote:
> ...So we could do the following ... I nominate some new PPMCs and start a 
> vote.
> If not enough votes come in, I'll come back here asking for the IPMCs 
> assistance again

I think that works and apparently you have two active mentors so you
might need just one extra vote to get (re)started.

-Bertrand

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

Re: Restarting an IPMC?

Hi all,

well that's the main problem ... I doubt that we would have enough PPMCs voting.
I had addressed a security problem some time ago and didn't get a single 
response on the private list.

So we could do the following ... I nominate some new PPMCs and start a vote.
If not enough votes come in, I'll come back here asking for the IPMCs 
assistance again.

And regarding leaving: I would really like to stay as it took quite some effort 
setting up everything and having it run nicely on our systems.
Leaving with the intention of coming back would be weird. And we would have to 
stop calling it Edgent and would have to change the package and artifact names 
... 

Chris

Am 06.11.18, 09:27 schrieb "Bertrand Delacretaz" :

Hi Chris,

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:19 AM Christofer Dutz
 wrote:
> ...  2.  Is it possible to sort of reset a podling IPMC and start with a 
new set of people?...

I think the easiest is to have the existing PMC vote in new members.

If that doesn't work, I think the votes of Incubator PMC members (who
are not necessarily mentors of that podling) are valid for electing
new podling committers and PPMC members. In the end the Incubator PMC
is in charge of all podlings.

By the way I think you mean "restarting a PPMC" in the subject line.

-Bertrand

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

Re: Restarting an IPMC?

UPS ... didn't mean the (I)PCM , but the (P)PMC ...

Am 06.11.18, 09:18 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" :

Hi all,

as it seems and as I have reported in the last podling report, the Apache 
Edgent project had been suffering of one of the things that happen if you don’t 
have a diverse committer base.
After IBM pulling out the Edgent contributors we are left effectively with 
only me. After mentioning my thoughts about asking to retire Edgent, some 
people have been popping up stating their academic work being based somewhat on 
Edgent and their willingness to start actively participating.

So I have a few questions:

  1.  Is there anyone here on this list, willing to contribute as 
Committer/PPMC or even as Mentor?
  2.  Is it possible to sort of reset a podling IPMC and start with a new 
set of people?
  3.  Should we retire, continue outside and come back as soon as we have a 
new little community?

I would definitely prefer 1 and 2 being answered positively ;-)

Chris

Re: Restarting an IPMC?

Hi Chris,

On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:19 AM Christofer Dutz
 wrote:
> ...  2.  Is it possible to sort of reset a podling IPMC and start with a new 
> set of people?...

I think the easiest is to have the existing PMC vote in new members.

If that doesn't work, I think the votes of Incubator PMC members (who
are not necessarily mentors of that podling) are valid for electing
new podling committers and PPMC members. In the end the Incubator PMC
is in charge of all podlings.

By the way I think you mean "restarting a PPMC" in the subject line.

-Bertrand

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

Re: Restarting an IPMC?

Hi,

Good to see that the honest (stark even) podling report got several people 
expressing interest in the project.

>  1.  Is there anyone here on this list, willing to contribute as 
> Committer/PPMC or even as Mentor?

I’m happy to continue as a mentor, the project currently has 2 mentors. If no 
one steps up, you Chris as a recent IPMC member could be a mentor. Or is that a 
bit too weird?

>  2.  Is it possible to sort of reset a podling IPMC and start with a new set 
> of people?

The existing PPMC would need to vote new people in, I think you have enough 
active PPMC members (just) to do that.

>  3.  Should we retire, continue outside and come back as soon as we have a 
> new little community?

That is also an option for the PPM to consider.

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

[PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Hi,

I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it says
nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it that the
IPMC can decide how it wants to do that.

Currently the IPMC can vote people in (which is not so common) or an ASF member
can request it. I’m not sure where the ASF member requirement came from and
wasn’t able to find the discussion about this on the incubator list. (If anyone
knows please point me to it.)

In theory an ASF member should have the knowledge and skills to mentor a
project, however I also think those who have gone through the incubating
process, have voted on releases and proposed or accepted new committers and PMC
members probably know just as much even if they are not ASF members. They may
not have as much experience but shovel at least know the basics.

Now identifying everyone who has done this would not be be easy to determine
and the Venn diagram of them and people who want to be mentors is probably
small (but still significant in numbers).

So I propose this:

If someone has done several of the following:
- has been involved in an incubating project from start to finish
- has been a release manager
- has assembled LICENSE and NOTICE files
- has reviewed and voted on releases
- has proposed or accepted committers/PPMC members

Then they can ask the IPMC to join to IPMC by sending an email to private@
listing what they have been involved in. The IPMC would VOTE on them, and
there’s a chance they could be rejected, but given it’s a private vote I don’t
think any harm is done if that happens. Also people could nominate other people
who fit into this above group.

I’d like to see this used for people who are wanting to be mentors, rather than
just having binding votes on releases. I don’t have an issue with the later
(and I think the IPMC currently does a decent job of catching any issues with
releases they come their way), but that’s what I’m trying to solve with this
proposal. i.e. We currently need more mentors and will need even more as ASF
scales up.

The subject line is actually a lie. All this really changes is that people can
bring themselves or be brought to the attention of the IPMC, rather than having
the IPMC actively trying to find people from graduated projects who then may or
may not want to be IPMC members.

We could start this off as an experiment. and take the first few people who
request it, and see how it goes with more experienced mentors observing and/ or
helping them.

What do people and the IPMC think of this proposal? Good idea or not? Could it
work with some modifications? Is it not needed at all?

Thanks,
Justin

1.
https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/websites/production/incubator/content/official/resolution.html
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Restarting an IPMC?

Hi all,

as it seems and as I have reported in the last podling report, the Apache 
Edgent project had been suffering of one of the things that happen if you don’t 
have a diverse committer base.
After IBM pulling out the Edgent contributors we are left effectively with only 
me. After mentioning my thoughts about asking to retire Edgent, some people 
have been popping up stating their academic work being based somewhat on Edgent 
and their willingness to start actively participating.

So I have a few questions:

  1.  Is there anyone here on this list, willing to contribute as 
Committer/PPMC or even as Mentor?
  2.  Is it possible to sort of reset a podling IPMC and start with a new set 
of people?
  3.  Should we retire, continue outside and come back as soon as we have a new 
little community?

I would definitely prefer 1 and 2 being answered positively ;-)

Chris

Re: [DISCUSS] Iceberg proposal for incubation

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 7:04 PM Ryan Blue  wrote:
>... I'd like to start a discussion about moving Netflix's Iceberg project to
> the incubator...

Looks like a very interesting project!

>...I can post it to the wiki as well if that's needed,...

Yes please, it's good to have all proposals there - as soon as it's
past the draft stage.

-Bertrand

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

Re: Voting in new IPMC members