date:20190213

Hi,

> If we all say fine.. let's just throw more paperwork at it, I would ask you
> to help draft a line for the NOTICE of what we would do. suppose we would
> also have to do this for gradle etc.

You would need to do this for any 3rd party file bundled with a release and yes 
sometimes this is complex and takes time. See for example Apache Newt. [1]

> So basically if we accept that the new norm is this level of detail on
> incidental files,

It’s a 3rd party file not an incidental file and the ASF has policy around what 
to do when including 3rd party files which a (P)PMC and releases need to comply 
with. [2][3]

To comply however is a simple change that needs to be made once to clearly 
inculcate the IP province and license of that file to users of the projects.

> would it be "this includes source generated by the takari maven plugin"?
> and of course if we say this, the next cruft is explaining gradle etc.

If you don’t know what to do ask you mentors or the IPMC for help. If you 
disagree with advice given then clarify on legal-discuss.

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://github.com/apache/mynewt-newt/blob/master/LICENSE
2. http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#goal
3. http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html#valid


-
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"?

Hi,

> I have a quick question from a podling's perspective, should the
> decision for release convenient binaries be left to PPMC or IPMC?

If the binary are based on source that have been approve as an offical releases 
there are no issues, just take care to comply with branding and trademarks.

If it based on unreleased code then more care needs to be taken, it can’t be 
offered or advertised outside the developers and needs to be clearly labeled. 
The important question to ask is “If a user came across this, could they think 
it was an Apache release?” If the answer is yes then more work needs to be done.

IMO only the PPMC needs to be involved, the IPMC may take a look and suggest 
room for improvement.


> Besides [1], I think it is also better to add it to [2]. I noticed it
> uses "binary distribution" rather than "binary release”.

Binary distribution would be the correct term.

Thanks,
Justin

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

> But in the end ... if we actually do include code by takari isn't if fair
> to mention it?
>
this is where I am trying to get at actually. is it an intention to change
the NOTICE files

After all it's not just the Java code the wrapper scripts themselves should
> count too.
> And in the end it's a one-time addition that will stick there for the rest
> of time.
> So give it 5 minutes (max) of work and we're on the safe side. Better than
> loosing
> Hours in email discussions ;-)
>
not quite true I think you know the act of changing artifacts and release
can be very expensive in practice. some projects have review on trivial
things as well. Then, new projects get to be dinged for yet another thing.
If they have to re release once it can cost 10hrs easy.

Some might simply not distribute the wrapper anymore. people are weird.
NOTICE file particularly because some feel it is a credit thing. being
listed or not listed is emotional. even if I dont personally care, I dont
particularly want to converse with someone about why their name is not in
there while takari is.

This is why I think when we are changing enforcement, and clearly this is a
change, we should think it through. This is important precedent wise.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo OPS (Incubating) 0.1 [RC3]

2019-02-13 Thread Huxing Zhang

Hi

On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:18 AM Justin Mclean  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> An option would be to just release the source release if it gets 3 +1 votes.

+1(non-binding) for to just the release the source without the binary
distribution.

According to the discussion in[1], I think the binary distribution
should not block the source release.

[1] 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ceb357513ff0403414b5fff7dbeb1ea43961e71f9e48425d6e3cea8f@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E


>
> +1 (binding) on source release
>
> For the source release I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - signatures and hashes file
> - DISCLAIMER exists
> - LICENSE and NOTICE good
> - No unexpected binary files
> - All source files have ASF headers
> - Can compile from source
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>


--
Best Regards！
Huxing

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

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo Spring Boot Project (Incubating) 2.7.0

2019-02-13 Thread Mercy


Hi


The release vote finished, We’ve received

3 (+1 binding) from Willem Jiang, Von Gosling and Justin Mclean

0 (-1 binding)

0 (+1 unbinding)


The vote and result thread:

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/62651628cfa1384f1a0030fc2d45ac529b1883c02812c33278fb9471@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E

The vote passed. I am working on the further release process, thanks.


Best regards,

The Apache Dubbo (Incubating) Team


-
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"?

2019-02-13 Thread Huxing Zhang

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:06 AM Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 6:59 AM Jim Jagielski  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 15, 2018, at 2:41 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz 
> > >  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I see this as a two-level thing:
> > >
> > > a) The source release is an Act of the Foundation, it is what the
> > > foundation produces
> > >
> > > b) For the binaries, the PMC states that it thinks they are good and
> > > declares that the published digests and signatures are the correct
> > > ones. The Foundation does not state anything about them - use at your
> > > own risk but in practice that risk is very low if the PMC members
> > > collectively recommend using them.
> > >
> > > That's not very different from what other open source projects do - we
> > > need a) for our legal shield but b) is exactly like random open source
> > > projects operate.
> > >
> > > You have to trust an open source project when you use their binaries,
> > > and you can use digests and signatures to verify that those binaries
> > > are the same that everyone else uses - I don't think anyone provides
> > > more guarantees than that, except when you pay for someone to state
> > > that those binaries are good.
> > >
> > > If people agree with this view we might need to explain this better,
> > > "unofficial" does not mean much, this two-level view might be more
> > > useful.
> >
> > Agree 100%. Thx for very clearly and accurately describing all this.
>
> +1 to this as well.

+1 for what Bertrand said.
I have a quick question from a podling's perspective, should the
decision for release convenient binaries be left to PPMC or IPMC?

>
> In fact, I love it so much that I'd like to have it published as part of our
> official guide:
>http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#compiled-packages
>
> Any objections?

+1 to add it to the documentation, so that we do not have to search
for mail archives.
Besides [1], I think it is also better to add it to [2]. I noticed it
uses "binary distribution" rather than "binary release".
So may be we should avoid using "binary release".

For how to do the check for binary distribution, I also suggest to add
it to [3].
For example:
If the source release is accompanied with convenient binaries, we should check:
- Does the LICENSE and NOTICE text exactly represent the contents of
the distribution they reside in?
- Does the jar files includes LICENSE/NOTICE/DISCLAIMER?

Correct me if I am wrong.

[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#compiled-packages
[2] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary
[3] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorReleaseChecklist


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


-- 
Best Regards！
Huxing

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

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Yeah well ...

But in the end ... if we actually do include code by takari isn't if fair to 
mention it?
After all it's not just the Java code the wrapper scripts themselves should 
count too.
And in the end it's a one-time addition that will stick there for the rest of 
time.
So give it 5 minutes (max) of work and we're on the safe side. Better than 
loosing
Hours in email discussions ;-)

I'll even add that Notice to the projects I added my file to (even if 
technically it would
Be Apache licensed code) It just takes too much explaining why these 3 PLC4X, 
Edgent 
And IoTDB ...

Chris


Am 14.02.19, 07:47 schrieb "Adrian Cole" :

> Does it help, that I wrote that file and submitted it in a pull request to
> eliminate the binary jar needed prior to my change? ... Guess that's also
> an additional reason why there's an Apache header on it :-)


imho it helps in so far as the work itself (thanks!) and also a subject
matter expert. I see this file as useful but incidental.

If we set a precedent towards having to re-link this file in our NOTICE..
you might expect this to cause a flurry of low value activity across every
project that uses it, to do the same, or projects like us feeling unfair
burden by accident of the month we joined the incubator.  ex if we did
early last year surely this discussion would haven't happened (as others
graduated before the more recent scrutiny of incubees.

If we all say fine.. let's just throw more paperwork at it, I would ask you
to help draft a line for the NOTICE of what we would do. suppose we would
also have to do this for gradle etc.

So basically if we accept that the new norm is this level of detail on
incidental files, we likely have more volunteer time spent policing and
remediation. We could at least tell them what to say.

would it be "this includes source generated by the takari maven plugin"?
and of course if we say this, the next cruft is explaining gradle etc.

do we want to do this? we can but is it really worthwhile?

you tell me

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Hi,

> And exactly that file in the Edgent and PLC4X project are copies of my 
> original code (My PR wasn't accepted till then)
> So IANAL, but if you copy the file from one of those, it should be ok ... 
> correct?

It OK from either source as it’s ALv2 licensed but id it was from the 3rd party 
it would need to have the correct header and you might want to mention that in 
LICENSE. If that 3rd party has a NOTICE then you need to propagate content from 
its NOTICE file (looks like no so nothing needs to be done). If it was taken 
from PLC4X then there’s no need to mention it in LICENSE unless you want but 
you would need to update the NOTICE file with the contents of  PLC4X NOTICE 
file.

This is why is important to know the provenance of every file in a release, 
depending on where they come from it can have different consequences and you 
end up with different LICENSE and NOTICE files.

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

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

> Does it help, that I wrote that file and submitted it in a pull request to
> eliminate the binary jar needed prior to my change? ... Guess that's also
> an additional reason why there's an Apache header on it :-)


imho it helps in so far as the work itself (thanks!) and also a subject
matter expert. I see this file as useful but incidental.

If we set a precedent towards having to re-link this file in our NOTICE..
you might expect this to cause a flurry of low value activity across every
project that uses it, to do the same, or projects like us feeling unfair
burden by accident of the month we joined the incubator.  ex if we did
early last year surely this discussion would haven't happened (as others
graduated before the more recent scrutiny of incubees.

If we all say fine.. let's just throw more paperwork at it, I would ask you
to help draft a line for the NOTICE of what we would do. suppose we would
also have to do this for gradle etc.

So basically if we accept that the new norm is this level of detail on
incidental files, we likely have more volunteer time spent policing and
remediation. We could at least tell them what to say.

would it be "this includes source generated by the takari maven plugin"?
and of course if we say this, the next cruft is explaining gradle etc.

do we want to do this? we can but is it really worthwhile?

you tell me

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

And exactly that file in the Edgent and PLC4X project are copies of my original 
code (My PR wasn't accepted till then)
So IANAL, but if you copy the file from one of those, it should be ok ... 
correct?
It was code written by someone with a signed ICLA, committed to an Apache 
project.

Chris

Am 14.02.19, 07:19 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" :

Does it help, that I wrote that file and submitted it in a pull request to 
eliminate the binary jar needed prior to my change? ... Guess that's also an 
additional reason why there's an Apache header on it :-)

Outlook für Android herunterladen


From: Mick Semb Wever 
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 7:05:02 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: the case of the maven wrapper


> As binaries are not allowed in source repos, the maven wrapper
> introduces a small java source file which bootstraps the tool. This
> has Apache license headers on it.

Takari is an Apache licensed codebase.

My understanding is that there is a requirement to include it in the 
NOTICE.txt file.
Furthermore, Takari contains no copyright. Is this of concern?

http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html


> As a part of Zipkin's first attempt to vote a release on the general
> list … asking for it to be in the NOTICE box.


One of the tings I've noticed is that the vetos on a podling's first 
release can be a bit harsh.

I do really love the "community over code" motto, and i would hope to see 
the incubator being a leader in displaying the warmth and inclusion that leads 
to a healthy and enjoyable community.

On releases I would rather see such vetos replaced with comments that are 
feedback, while still obvious that they are an issue that is expected to be 
fixed by the next release (and before graduation). I think this would be warmer 
feedback, and permit a more incremental approach to getting to the standard of 
release required for graduation.

Momentum and results is an important motivator, and there's a lot to learn 
about the ASF requirements on the podling's journey to graduation.


> It feels we are just
> adding things to it and as an end user, I'm not sure how this would
> add clarity.


An apache release is first aimed at someone who builds the source artefact. 
Even if this isn't the popular use-case.
This also highlights the value in having the takari wrapper in place.


> Even if it did, I'm concerned that we are jumping to a
> enforcement remediation when no-one seems to be doing it at all.


I've seen this unfairness bite a bit already.
Feedback that the incubator provides to podlings should be in context of 
the broader precedence in the ASF.
If it's something that's not being strictly adhered to by graduate 
projects, it would make a world of difference to podlings if they saw everyone 
was getting pulled up on the violation. Otherwise it comes across as podlings 
are required to meet a standard well above the graduate projects, and that 
becomes a real deterrence for many to entering Apache.

This would add some burden to the Incubator. Surveys of graduate projects 
would be required to see such precedence on issues. And resulting feedback to 
graduate projects can also be tricky, nobody likes to feel that they are being 
picked on. IDK, but maybe this feedback can go to the board, and the board can 
pick one issue per quarter and request projects address them by their next 
board report.

regards,
Mick

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

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

2019-02-13 Thread Mick Semb Wever



> > One of the tings I've noticed is that the vetos on a podling's first 
> > release can be a bit harsh.
> 
> A -1 on a release is not a veto. A release can still pass if it gets 3 
> +1 votes. However in this case because of the jar in a source release 
> it’s unlikely IMO to get 3 +1 IPMC votes.


You're quite right. A "-1" is not a veto on a release vote. (It is on any other 
vote.)
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

I would still say that many people, especially those new to ASF, feel that a 
"-1" is a veto (and receive it harshly).
As Incubator VP people do respect you, and comments on how we expect releases 
to be fixed (or improved for next time) i believe would be received better 
without the "-1", even if technically you are correct (and you are providing 
the feedback on ASF voting actually works).


> > This would add some burden to the Incubator.
> 
> I doubt the board will allow the incubator to do this, if you see an 
> issue at a TLP you can alway ask them to fix it al well.


My suggestion/thought-bubble wasn't the burden being the responsibility in 
getting graduate projects in fixing their violations, but only in surveying the 
precedence and extent of violations  among ASF projects. 

regards,
Mick

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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

>
> Did the Zipkin project file an SGA? If no, the contribution is all ICLA
> based and you are correct.


> If yes, then AFAIK Justin is correct, but there may be other edge cases.
>
There was no SGA. This particular codebase was also primarily authored by
iCLA signers. In Zipkin, we did an odd thing which was the IP stuff up
front.

Not every TLP may follow policy to the letter. Issues may have been missed
> in the past. A TLP may not have gone through the Incubator. You are free to
> examine the history of every project’s NOTICE file. If you do not accept
> the collective advice here and wish a ruling then you can ask the legal
> affairs committee at legal-disc...@apache.org by filing a LEGAL JIRA. But
> wait a bit to see. People who would answer there are as likely to answer
> here.
>
Most importantly, I am trying to figure out if advice is collective or not.
This is mainly an issue of understanding if all Justin's comments are to be
taken as a collective without others saying anything. We are lucky to have
people speak a lot but it would be nice to have especially detailed points
asked as "yeah you should do this" especially when others are clearly not.
I hope you saw my other thread opened as I doubt discussing also here will
get the same visibility into what could become a crisis if not watched over
well.

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Hi,

> Takari is an Apache licensed codebase. My understanding is that there is a 
> requirement to include it in the NOTICE.txt file.

You may wish to note that in LICENSE [1]  But content will only go in NOTICE if 
it has it has it’s own NOTICE file. [1]

> Furthermore, Takari contains no copyright. Is this of concern?

It may not contain a copyright statement but copyright exist all the same and 
that owner isn’t going to be the ASF. You could always ask them to add one as 
the appendix of the ASF licens  e asks to do [2] Note that that header 
contains a copyright statement unlike the one use for code developed at the ASF.


> One of the tings I've noticed is that the vetos on a podling's first release 
> can be a bit harsh.

A -1 on a release is not a veto. A release can still pass if it gets 3 +1 
votes. However in this case because of the jar in a source release it’s 
unlikely IMO to get 3 +1 IPMC votes.

> On releases I would rather see such vetos replaced with comments that are 
> feedback, while still obvious that they are an issue that is expected to be 
> fixed by the next release (and before graduation).

If the issue are minor I do that, see the Doris votes from today (and countless 
other examples) but there are a few things like compiled code in a release or 
category X licensed content in a release that I’ve always voted -1 on in the 
300 or so releases I’ve voted on.

> If it's something that's not being strictly adhered to by graduate projects, 
> it would make a world of difference to podlings if they saw everyone was 
> getting pulled up on the violation.

The incubator has no remit over TLPs, their PMCs should know enough to catch 
these sort of issues and fix them themselves. Where issues have been noticed 
and are causing podlings confusion the IPMC has asked for them to be fixed, but 
all we can do is ask.

> This would add some burden to the Incubator.

I doubt the board will allow the incubator to do this, if you see an issue at a 
TLP you can alway ask them to fix it al well.

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
2. https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Please see my response in the other thread. I didn’t see this rethreading.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 13, 2019, at 9:29 PM, Adrian Cole  wrote:
> 
> To help others participate, here is the original thread:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8e9b5ec9b8fcc14427bee4dc64f4db7692b787e6349ed348b983d914@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> 
> Here is the part about the file in question:
>> Should this file have an ASF header? [2] Where did it originally come from? 
>> Answer to this question may mean that some changes to LICENSE and HEADER are 
>> required.
>> 2. .mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java
> 
> My goal is to verify that Justin's attention to detail matches what
> experience IPMC, and more importantly what Apache desires when
> applying their policy. In that manner, I really want to hear from
> projects who are willing to change their own code each time Justin
> asks an incubator project to do that. Of course, unrelated feedback is
> also good!
> 
> -A
> 
> -
> 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: the case of the maven wrapper

Does it help, that I wrote that file and submitted it in a pull request to 
eliminate the binary jar needed prior to my change? ... Guess that's also an 
additional reason why there's an Apache header on it :-)

Outlook für Android herunterladen

From: Mick Semb Wever 
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 7:05:02 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: the case of the maven wrapper

> As binaries are not allowed in source repos, the maven wrapper
> introduces a small java source file which bootstraps the tool. This
> has Apache license headers on it.

Takari is an Apache licensed codebase.

My understanding is that there is a requirement to include it in the NOTICE.txt 
file.
Furthermore, Takari contains no copyright. Is this of concern?

http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html

> As a part of Zipkin's first attempt to vote a release on the general
> list … asking for it to be in the NOTICE box.

One of the tings I've noticed is that the vetos on a podling's first release 
can be a bit harsh.

I do really love the "community over code" motto, and i would hope to see the 
incubator being a leader in displaying the warmth and inclusion that leads to a 
healthy and enjoyable community.

On releases I would rather see such vetos replaced with comments that are 
feedback, while still obvious that they are an issue that is expected to be 
fixed by the next release (and before graduation). I think this would be warmer 
feedback, and permit a more incremental approach to getting to the standard of 
release required for graduation.

Momentum and results is an important motivator, and there's a lot to learn 
about the ASF requirements on the podling's journey to graduation.

> It feels we are just
> adding things to it and as an end user, I'm not sure how this would
> add clarity.

An apache release is first aimed at someone who builds the source artefact. 
Even if this isn't the popular use-case.
This also highlights the value in having the takari wrapper in place.

> Even if it did, I'm concerned that we are jumping to a
> enforcement remediation when no-one seems to be doing it at all.

I've seen this unfairness bite a bit already.
Feedback that the incubator provides to podlings should be in context of the 
broader precedence in the ASF.
If it's something that's not being strictly adhered to by graduate projects, it 
would make a world of difference to podlings if they saw everyone was getting 
pulled up on the violation. Otherwise it comes across as podlings are required 
to meet a standard well above the graduate projects, and that becomes a real 
deterrence for many to entering Apache.

This would add some burden to the Incubator. Surveys of graduate projects would 
be required to see such precedence on issues. And resulting feedback to 
graduate projects can also be tricky, nobody likes to feel that they are being 
picked on. IDK, but maybe this feedback can go to the board, and the board can 
pick one issue per quarter and request projects address them by their next 
board report.

regards,
Mick

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

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

2019-02-13 Thread Mick Semb Wever



> As binaries are not allowed in source repos, the maven wrapper
> introduces a small java source file which bootstraps the tool. This
> has Apache license headers on it. 

Takari is an Apache licensed codebase. 

My understanding is that there is a requirement to include it in the NOTICE.txt 
file.
Furthermore, Takari contains no copyright. Is this of concern?

http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html


> As a part of Zipkin's first attempt to vote a release on the general
> list … asking for it to be in the NOTICE box. 


One of the tings I've noticed is that the vetos on a podling's first release 
can be a bit harsh.

I do really love the "community over code" motto, and i would hope to see the 
incubator being a leader in displaying the warmth and inclusion that leads to a 
healthy and enjoyable community.

On releases I would rather see such vetos replaced with comments that are 
feedback, while still obvious that they are an issue that is expected to be 
fixed by the next release (and before graduation). I think this would be warmer 
feedback, and permit a more incremental approach to getting to the standard of 
release required for graduation.

Momentum and results is an important motivator, and there's a lot to learn 
about the ASF requirements on the podling's journey to graduation.


> It feels we are just
> adding things to it and as an end user, I'm not sure how this would
> add clarity. 


An apache release is first aimed at someone who builds the source artefact. 
Even if this isn't the popular use-case.
This also highlights the value in having the takari wrapper in place.


> Even if it did, I'm concerned that we are jumping to a
> enforcement remediation when no-one seems to be doing it at all.


I've seen this unfairness bite a bit already.
Feedback that the incubator provides to podlings should be in context of the 
broader precedence in the ASF.
If it's something that's not being strictly adhered to by graduate projects, it 
would make a world of difference to podlings if they saw everyone was getting 
pulled up on the violation. Otherwise it comes across as podlings are required 
to meet a standard well above the graduate projects, and that becomes a real 
deterrence for many to entering Apache.

This would add some burden to the Incubator. Surveys of graduate projects would 
be required to see such precedence on issues. And resulting feedback to 
graduate projects can also be tricky, nobody likes to feel that they are being 
picked on. IDK, but maybe this feedback can go to the board, and the board can 
pick one issue per quarter and request projects address them by their next 
board report.

regards,
Mick

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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi Adrian/Justin,

We are discussing the wrong points. The clear question is what is 
MavenWrapperDownloader.java and why does it need to be in source release? It 
doesn’t.

The Zipkin build instruction should include the installation instructions for 
MavenWrapper. [3]

Adrian will that work for Zipkin?

Regards,
Dave

[3] https://www.baeldung.com/maven-wrapper

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 13, 2019, at 6:07 PM, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) as it contains compiled code (a .jar) [1], an ASF 
> release must consist of source code only. The other issue are minor IMO and 
> can be fixed in a future release.
> 
> I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - signature and hashed correct
> - LICENSE is fine
> - NOTICE has some minor issue (see below)
> - All source files have have headers
> - An unexpected binary file in source release [1]
> - Can compile from source
> 
> Re NOTICE did you project come to the ASF in 2016? Who did it come from, and 
> if the headers were changed to ASF ones then they should be mentioned in 
> NOTICE.
> 
> Should this file have an ASF header? [2] Where did it originally come from? 
> Answer to this question may mean that some changes to LICENSE and HEADER are 
> required.
> 
> Re the maven wrapper jar several project have run into this issue and have 
> managed to resolve it without including the jar. You should be able to find 
> them with a search of this list. BTW A warning that rat didn’t pick this up 
> and it seem it doesn’t follow directories with a dot in front of them.
> 
> While i can compile it looks like the build assumes the code is checked out 
> of GitHub and you’re not compiling the source release as I get a lot of these:
> failure occured while calling class 
> com.mycila.maven.plugin.license.git.CopyrightRangeProvider
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Could not compute the year of the last git commit 
> for file x
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 
> 1. ./.mvn/wrapper/maven-wrapper.jar
> 2. .mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo OPS (Incubating) 0.1 [RC3]

2019-02-13 Thread Minxuan Zhuang

thanks, can I release the source release only in this version? and I can
fix the binary release in the next version.
thanks for @Willem Jiang to point out the binary license issue,  can you
please vote for the source release again？

On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:18 AM Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> An option would be to just release the source release if it gets 3 +1
> votes.
>
> +1 (binding) on source release
>
> For the source release I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - signatures and hashes file
> - DISCLAIMER exists
> - LICENSE and NOTICE good
> - No unexpected binary files
> - All source files have ASF headers
> - Can compile from source
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi Adrian,

Simple question inline.

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 13, 2019, at 8:33 PM, Adrian Cole  wrote:

>> See [1][2] on policy and many many projects do it except those that were 
>> developed solely at the ASF.
> In practice, you can find many, many that have stock files and were
> not developed solely at the ASF.
> 
> Considering our statement was "The OpenZipkin Authors", I have not
> seen any file at all like this.. noting a non-legal entity.. though I
> haven't searched the entire org.
> I'm not saying this to be argumentative, rather it feels like cruft
> and not commonly applied. I wish others would chime in on topics like
> this.

Did the Zipkin project file an SGA? If no, the contribution is all ICLA based 
and you are correct.

If yes, then AFAIK Justin is correct, but there may be other edge cases.

> 
>> Where does the code original come from is the question? That ASF header 
>> states it was licensed to the ASF under an CLA. Is this actually the case?
> 
> Again, this seems a site of unique enforcement with questionable
> clarity as a result. You seem to want us to add a statement saying
> that this code came from the Takari maven plugin and/or to investigate
> their CLA process. You are asking us eventhough many many projects use
> this as-is. We can follow this, but the same feedback applies.
> 
> The general feedback is that we are being asked to do things of
> questionable value even if it is to the letter of the law as you
> interpret it. Meanwhile graduated projects do not fall under this more
> strict regime and the types of enforcement are certainly more strict.
> It seems strict enforcements in general should be a community decide
> thing vs one person, even if you are very qualified, Justin.

Not every TLP may follow policy to the letter. Issues may have been missed in 
the past. A TLP may not have gone through the Incubator. You are free to 
examine the history of every project’s NOTICE file. If you do not accept the 
collective advice here and wish a ruling then you can ask the legal affairs 
committee at legal-disc...@apache.org by filing a LEGAL JIRA. But wait a bit to 
see. People who would answer there are as likely to answer here.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> -
> 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: the case of the maven wrapper

To help others participate, here is the original thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8e9b5ec9b8fcc14427bee4dc64f4db7692b787e6349ed348b983d914@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E

Here is the part about the file in question:
> Should this file have an ASF header? [2] Where did it originally come from? 
> Answer to this question may mean that some changes to LICENSE and HEADER are 
> required.
> 2. .mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java

My goal is to verify that Justin's attention to detail matches what
experience IPMC, and more importantly what Apache desires when
applying their policy. In that manner, I really want to hear from
projects who are willing to change their own code each time Justin
asks an incubator project to do that. Of course, unrelated feedback is
also good!

-A

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

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Hi,

> As a part of Zipkin's first attempt to vote a release on the general
> list, Justin lightly dinged the maven wrapper file, asking for it to
> be in the NOTICE box.

I didn’t ask that all I asked was where the file was from. In general very list 
needs to go in NOTICE, this included:
a) relocated copyright notices
b) stuff propagated from other ALv2 NOTICE files
c) required 3rd party notices (very uncommon)

Thanks,
Justin



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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi,

> Again, this seems a site of unique enforcement with questionable
> clarity as a result. You seem to want us to add a statement saying
> that this code came from the Takari maven plugin and/or to investigate
> their CLA process.

Um no I want you to respect the license and headers of 3rd party code. I don’t 
know where that code came from, perhaps if you told me we could work out how 
best to deal with it. You seem to have confirmed it’s comes from a a 3rd party 
and not the ASF so it seems unlikely it should have an ASF header on it.

> The general feedback is that we are being asked to do things of
> questionable value

If you think that not complying with ASF licensing policy is of questionable 
value I can’t help you.

>  Meanwhile graduated projects do not fall under this more
> strict regime and the types of enforcement are certainly more strict.

If a graduated project is found to not be complying with licensing policy they 
will be asked to comply, hopefully they will notice and fix it themselves 
before that but sometimes things slip between the cracks. And yes I have asked 
TLPs to fix things e.g. With Apache Spark as a number of incubator projects 
were copying what they were doing and it was not in line with license policy 
and they fixed it. Copying what TLPs do without understanding why things are 
done that way often causes incubating projects issues.

I also agree it would be good for other IPMC member to add their thoughts as 
well.

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Guidelines for distribution of incubating artefacts on other platforms

2019-02-13 Thread Hongtao Gao

Thanks for your effort get them documented. I'm a PPMC member of Apache
SkyWalking and One of my major responsibilities is to distribute docker
image. So this thread fairly help me. I have two questions here.

First is about "Transition Period". When Apache official Dockerhub
repository is created all other illegal repository(eg.
https://hub.docker.com/u/skywalking/ ) should be removed. The end users
will do extra work to change their system, that requires time. So I propose
to give a transition period which maybe between 3 months and half of year.
That's also open for discussion.

Next is about kubernetes. In short I have a plan to use https://hub.helm.sh
to distribute kubernetes yamls for skywalking. This platform seems like
Dockerhub. Could I use it like a Dockerhub? But I don't distribute any
binary or source codes to it except for some kubernetes deloyment yamls.
I'm wondering if helmhub is suitable for the guidelines we discuss here.

Thanks
Hongtao Gao

On Thu, Feb 14, 2019, 11:25 AM Justin Mclean  Hi,
>
> > I would like to see his guideline document posted somewhere on cwiki so
> it doesn’t get lost in this thread.
>
> It is [1] if by cwiki you mean wiki.apache.org?
>
> > I would ultimately like both VP Legal and Infra to assess it, so that
> everyone’s on the same page in terms of what’s “allowed,” because right
> now, I think we’re all flying by the seat of our pants.
>
> That was going to be my next steps after the IPMC was happy with it, legal
> already know about it but I’ve not had any feedback from them yet.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/DistributionGuidelines
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019, 11:25 AM Justin Mclean  Hi,
>
> > I would like to see his guideline document posted somewhere on cwiki so
> it doesn’t get lost in this thread.
>
> It is [1] if by cwiki you mean wiki.apache.org?
>
> > I would ultimately like both VP Legal and Infra to assess it, so that
> everyone’s on the same page in terms of what’s “allowed,” because right
> now, I think we’re all flying by the seat of our pants.
>
> That was going to be my next steps after the IPMC was happy with it, legal
> already know about it but I’ve not had any feedback from them yet.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/DistributionGuidelines
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

the case of the maven wrapper

I suspect this has gone around in some incarnations, but I wanted to
bring the topic to the front.

One of the main problems solved in Gradle was environment consistency
through "wrapper scripts". Wrappers lock the version of the tool and
incidental dependencies in order to stabilize the build. This approach
was backported to Maven, and the more popular wrapper seems to be by
Takari.

As binaries are not allowed in source repos, the maven wrapper
introduces a small java source file which bootstraps the tool. This
has Apache license headers on it. Many apache projects use this, but
I'm not going to mention them specifically as I don't want to cause
them work.

As a part of Zipkin's first attempt to vote a release on the general
list, Justin lightly dinged the maven wrapper file, asking for it to
be in the NOTICE box. While this is possibly a reasonably ask, it is
ironic as its presence was to avoid another ding (jar inclusion).
https://github.com/takari/maven-wrapper/blob/master/.mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java

While we can add some text like "the maven wrapper is also licensed to
apache", I'm concerned about cruft in the NOTICE. It feels we are just
adding things to it and as an end user, I'm not sure how this would
add clarity. Even if it did, I'm concerned that we are jumping to a
enforcement remediation when no-one seems to be doing it at all.

I would like to feel things like this are thought through, that
multiple people agree to enforce something even if it can reasonably
be thought as required. It feels like this has either not been
discussed or not applied.. possibly some just sacrifice users by
excluding the wrapper, maybe only to avoid having to add cruft to
their NOTICE files.. who knows.

TL;DR; is can people please discuss this and chime in? I would feel
better about the incubator process if not just code was a community
process, but also enforcement policies.

If more than one person says.. yeah you totally should blurb this..
and those people themselves use the wrapper and are willing to update
their own NOTICE files.. the incubator would feel like a more fair
place than it feels today.

Best,
-Adrian

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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

> See [1][2] on policy and many many projects do it except those that were 
> developed solely at the ASF.
In practice, you can find many, many that have stock files and were
not developed solely at the ASF.

Considering our statement was "The OpenZipkin Authors", I have not
seen any file at all like this.. noting a non-legal entity.. though I
haven't searched the entire org.
I'm not saying this to be argumentative, rather it feels like cruft
and not commonly applied. I wish others would chime in on topics like
this.

> Where does the code original come from is the question? That ASF header 
> states it was licensed to the ASF under an CLA. Is this actually the case?

Again, this seems a site of unique enforcement with questionable
clarity as a result. You seem to want us to add a statement saying
that this code came from the Takari maven plugin and/or to investigate
their CLA process. You are asking us eventhough many many projects use
this as-is. We can follow this, but the same feedback applies.

The general feedback is that we are being asked to do things of
questionable value even if it is to the letter of the law as you
interpret it. Meanwhile graduated projects do not fall under this more
strict regime and the types of enforcement are certainly more strict.
It seems strict enforcements in general should be a community decide
thing vs one person, even if you are very qualified, Justin.

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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi,

> I've not seen any example of a project noting prior headers like this,
> so I winged a pull request. Feedback welcome!

See [1][2] on policy and many many projects do it except those that were 
developed solely at the ASF.

> similar to above, I've not found any apache project special-casing the
> maven wrapper downloader file.

Where does the code original come from is the question? That ASF header states 
it was licensed to the ASF under an CLA. Is this actually the case?

>  If so, wouldn't most apache projects need to do this, as opposed to just us?

I have no idea what other Apache project do, but they do need to follow header 
and license policy yes.

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers
2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

> Re NOTICE did you project come to the ASF in 2016? Who did it come from, and 
> if the headers were changed to ASF ones then they should be mentioned in 
> NOTICE.
I've not seen any example of a project noting prior headers like this,
so I winged a pull request. Feedback welcome!
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zipkin-brave-karaf/pull/30

> Should this file have an ASF header? [2] Where did it originally come from? 
> Answer to this question may mean that some changes to LICENSE and HEADER are 
> required.
> [2] .mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java
similar to above, I've not found any apache project special-casing the
maven wrapper downloader file. We didn't affect the headers either..
are you looking for a statement inside NOTICE to say we used takari's
script to generate this? Is that required considering the license
header is apache? If so, wouldn't most apache projects need to do
this, as opposed to just us?

> Re the maven wrapper jar several project have run into this issue and have 
> managed to resolve it without including the jar. You should be able to find 
> them with a search of this list. BTW A warning that rat didn’t pick this up 
> and it seem it doesn’t follow directories with a dot in front of them.
done - https://github.com/apache/incubator-zipkin-brave-karaf/pull/30

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Guidelines for distribution of incubating artefacts on other platforms

Hi,

> I would like to see his guideline document posted somewhere on cwiki so it 
> doesn’t get lost in this thread.

It is [1] if by cwiki you mean wiki.apache.org?

> I would ultimately like both VP Legal and Infra to assess it, so that 
> everyone’s on the same page in terms of what’s “allowed,” because right now, 
> I think we’re all flying by the seat of our pants.

That was going to be my next steps after the IPMC was happy with it, legal 
already know about it but I’ve not had any feedback from them yet.

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/DistributionGuidelines
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo OPS (Incubating) 0.1 [RC3]

Hi,

An option would be to just release the source release if it gets 3 +1 votes.

+1 (binding) on source release

For the source release I checked:
- incubating in name
- signatures and hashes file
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE and NOTICE good
- No unexpected binary files
- All source files have ASF headers
- Can compile from source

Thanks,
Justin

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Guidelines for distribution of incubating artefacts on other platforms

2019-02-13 Thread Chris Lambertus

> On Feb 12, 2019, at 11:36 PM, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 

>> Does this mean that we need a vote even for distribution of unreleased
>> material ?
> 
> You are not allowed to distribute unreleased material outside the developer 
> community. [1] I would read that as users being outside the developer 
> community.

OK, IPMC/member hat securely on. I’m not speaking for Infra here.

Releases on dockerhub, NPM, gradle, etc, etc, etc, etc, which are nominally 
tagged as “convenience binaries” end up being far more widely spread than the 
“developer community” due to the nature of those systems. 

There’s a lot of talk in this else-thread, and a lot of reticence to address 
the “we release source, not binaries” issue. The reality is that end-users 
consume binaries. Unless you’re a release manager for a major OS, nobody 
compiles source anymore. It’s the elephant in the room, and what’s happening 
now is that binary objects are popping up all over the place. I’m going to pick 
on Docker because I hate it so much: Infra has allowed a fair bit of leeway 
here, they previously created only automated builds, but over time have allowed 
more general access to projects in order to allow them to create nightlies, 
regenerate builds, and so forth, because it was more efficient and expedient to 
do so. This is a double edged sword in that we as the Foundation are allowing 
projects to work with their customer base without undue restriction, but we 
have essentially zero control over what artifacts are released. Furthermore, I 
don’t know that we have a lot of ability to stop it, short of curtailing access 
to the official /u/apache/ namespace and other namespaces that Infra may 
control.

I think the discussions here and the framework that’s been offered by Justin is 
a fantastic start, and I’m 100% in favor of it. I would like to see his 
guideline document posted somewhere on cwiki so it doesn’t get lost in this 
thread. I would ultimately like both VP Legal and Infra to assess it, so that 
everyone’s on the same page in terms of what’s “allowed,” because right now, I 
think we’re all flying by the seat of our pants.

-Chris

> 
>> Incubator-weex had used unofficial release without vote to get quick
>> feedback from users before we knew it could break the rule of Apache
>> release. *According to my understanding, any format of release on any
>> platform needs a vote even if it is unofficial, snapshot, nightly build and
>> etc..* Correct me if I am wrong.
> 
> Well a snapshots shot or nightly may be OK if it a) not use as a substitute 
> for not voting b) clearly marked so a user wouldn’t assume it a release and 
> c) not placed in the main place user go to to get it. I would guess that the 
> above doesn’t qualify but check with your mentors.
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 
> 1. https://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution.html#unreleased
> -
> 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] Release Apache NetBeans parent pom 1

Hi,

Sorry but it’s -1 binding as the artefacts do not have incubating in their 
name. [1]

I checking
- no incubating in name [1] It might also be a good idea to add apache in there 
as well.
- signatures and hashed good
- DISCLAIMER exits
- LICENSE is OK
- NOTICE has wrong year
- No source code and no binaries
- Can compile from source

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#releases


1. 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/netbeans/incubator-netbeans-mavenutils/netbeans-parent/
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

> The product name is a problem.
>
> Please explain how this release relates to Apache Karaf? We can give you 
> branding guidance once you do.
Sure thing. Zipkin is a tracing system and Brave is the original name
of the tracing libary, and the most widely used one. We currently file
"Brave" under the "Zipkin" brand, though users of it think of the
product as a top-level one.

As tracing ends up integrating with other libraries, our artifacts end
up being named brave-XXX where XXX is the library it is supporting.
For example, the brave repo itself has a dozen such things. Karaf was
split out because it is a specialized community with its own notion of
tests and such (PAX exam , etc).

So, this repo includes support libraries for those using Karaf
directly or indirectly (via CXF). Most of the Zipkin community
(including me) are not that familiar with the Karaf ecosystem. We've
mostly been just supporting the library by updating build etc and
trying to keep it passing tests.

Christian Schneider wrote most of this and we've had some advice from
Andriy Redko as well. Folks like these could likely more intelligently
answer Karaf related specifics.

Hope this helps, and thanks for having a look!
-A

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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Doris 0.9.0-incubating-rc02

Hi,

+1 binding but LICENSE is missing a couple of licenses please fix in next 
release.

Checked:
- incubating in name
- hashes and signatures good
- LICENSE is missing some licenses (se below)
- NOTICE is fine
- No unexpected binaries in file
- All ASF source files have ASF headers
- On OSX so didn’t build

LICENSE is missing MIT licensed Sizzle.js [1] included in jQuery and MIT 
licensed normalize.css included in bootstrap.css.

Thanks.
Justin

1. ./webroot/static/jquery.js
2. ./webroot/static/bootstrap.css


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

The product name is a problem.

Please explain how this release relates to Apache Karaf? We can give you 
branding guidance once you do.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 13, 2019, at 6:07 PM, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) as it contains compiled code (a .jar) [1], an ASF 
> release must consist of source code only. The other issue are minor IMO and 
> can be fixed in a future release.
> 
> I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - signature and hashed correct
> - LICENSE is fine
> - NOTICE has some minor issue (see below)
> - All source files have have headers
> - An unexpected binary file in source release [1]
> - Can compile from source
> 
> Re NOTICE did you project come to the ASF in 2016? Who did it come from, and 
> if the headers were changed to ASF ones then they should be mentioned in 
> NOTICE.
> 
> Should this file have an ASF header? [2] Where did it originally come from? 
> Answer to this question may mean that some changes to LICENSE and HEADER are 
> required.
> 
> Re the maven wrapper jar several project have run into this issue and have 
> managed to resolve it without including the jar. You should be able to find 
> them with a search of this list. BTW A warning that rat didn’t pick this up 
> and it seem it doesn’t follow directories with a dot in front of them.
> 
> While i can compile it looks like the build assumes the code is checked out 
> of GitHub and you’re not compiling the source release as I get a lot of these:
> failure occured while calling class 
> com.mycila.maven.plugin.license.git.CopyrightRangeProvider
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Could not compute the year of the last git commit 
> for file x
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 
> 1. ./.mvn/wrapper/maven-wrapper.jar
> 2. .mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java
> 
> 
> -
> 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] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi,

> As recutting, revoting, and reverifying is time consuming for the
> volunteers I will wait for someone else to also look at this (besides our
> mentors who already have) to save our folks the frustration of 3rd go round
> leading to a 4th.

That’s always a good idea any other IPMC have some time to take a look?

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

Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache Dubbo Spring Boot Project (Incubating) 2.7.0

Hi,

+1 binding

I checked:
- incubating in name
- signatures and hashes good
- DISCLAIMER exits
- LICENSE and NOTICE fine
- No unexpected binary files
- All source files have ASF headers
- Can compile from source

The jars in the convenience binary should probably include the DISCLAIMER as 
well as LICENSE and NOTICE in the META_INF directory.

Thanks,
Justin


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

thanks justin. I missed this part about the jar and know there are options
to it.

the license warnings were already resolved for the next release.

On the NOTICE, the headers originally said copyright "The OpenZipkin
Authors" I can put that into a pull request prior to re-cutting.

As recutting, revoting, and reverifying is time consuming for the
volunteers I will wait for someone else to also look at this (besides our
mentors who already have) to save our folks the frustration of 3rd go round
leading to a 4th.


On Thu, Feb 14, 2019, 10:08 AM Justin Mclean  Hi,
>
> Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) as it contains compiled code (a .jar) [1], an
> ASF release must consist of source code only. The other issue are minor IMO
> and can be fixed in a future release.
>
> I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - signature and hashed correct
> - LICENSE is fine
> - NOTICE has some minor issue (see below)
> - All source files have have headers
> - An unexpected binary file in source release [1]
> - Can compile from source
>
> Re NOTICE did you project come to the ASF in 2016? Who did it come from,
> and if the headers were changed to ASF ones then they should be mentioned
> in NOTICE.
>
> Should this file have an ASF header? [2] Where did it originally come
> from? Answer to this question may mean that some changes to LICENSE and
> HEADER are required.
>
> Re the maven wrapper jar several project have run into this issue and have
> managed to resolve it without including the jar. You should be able to find
> them with a search of this list. BTW A warning that rat didn’t pick this up
> and it seem it doesn’t follow directories with a dot in front of them.
>
> While i can compile it looks like the build assumes the code is checked
> out of GitHub and you’re not compiling the source release as I get a lot of
> these:
> failure occured while calling class
> com.mycila.maven.plugin.license.git.CopyrightRangeProvider
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Could not compute the year of the last git
> commit for file x
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. ./.mvn/wrapper/maven-wrapper.jar
> 2. .mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi,

Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) as it contains compiled code (a .jar) [1], an ASF 
release must consist of source code only. The other issue are minor IMO and can 
be fixed in a future release.

I checked:
- incubating in name
- signature and hashed correct
- LICENSE is fine
- NOTICE has some minor issue (see below)
- All source files have have headers
- An unexpected binary file in source release [1]
- Can compile from source

Re NOTICE did you project come to the ASF in 2016? Who did it come from, and if 
the headers were changed to ASF ones then they should be mentioned in NOTICE.

Should this file have an ASF header? [2] Where did it originally come from? 
Answer to this question may mean that some changes to LICENSE and HEADER are 
required.

Re the maven wrapper jar several project have run into this issue and have 
managed to resolve it without including the jar. You should be able to find 
them with a search of this list. BTW A warning that rat didn’t pick this up and 
it seem it doesn’t follow directories with a dot in front of them.

While i can compile it looks like the build assumes the code is checked out of 
GitHub and you’re not compiling the source release as I get a lot of these:
failure occured while calling class 
com.mycila.maven.plugin.license.git.CopyrightRangeProvider
java.lang.RuntimeException: Could not compute the year of the last git commit 
for file x

Thanks,
Justin

1. ./.mvn/wrapper/maven-wrapper.jar
2. .mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java


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

[VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hello All,

This is a call for vote to release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf
(Incubating) version 0.1.2

The Apache Zipkin community has voted on and approved a proposal to
release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2.

We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on
this incubator release.

Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) sets up tracing components such
that tools built Karaf needn't configure these explicitly.

Zipkin community vote and result thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e18e8561b6e1ad7bc6f544332d4e97e4f96a020de3e1e4cc721b7625@%3Cdev.zipkin.apache.org%3E

The release candidates:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/zipkin/brave-karaf/0.1.2/

Git tag for the release:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zipkin-brave-karaf/tree/v0.1.2

Hash for the release tag:
31545805a55dbe5e495403d84172fc865a4935e0

Release Notes:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-zipkin-brave-karaf/releases/tag/v0.1.2

The artifacts have been signed with Key : BB67A050, which can be found
in the keys file:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/zipkin/KEYS

Verification Hints:
For your convenience, the below includes detailed how-to on verifying
a source release. Please note that this document is a work-in-progress
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZIPKIN/Verifying+a+Source+Release

The vote will be open for at least 72 hours or until necessary number
of votes are reached.

Please vote accordingly:

[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove with the reason

Thanks,
The Apache Zipkin (Incubating) Team

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

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Lars Francke

>
> Would be interesting if this project includes training for developing
> Apache projects in any way, or would that make more sense under ComDev
> or some other project?
>

I'm not sure if I understand the question. Could you rephrase?
Do you mean training on "The Apache Way"?
And maybe also bring it up in the DISCUSS thread?


> On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 09:09, Dmitriy Pavlov  wrote:
> >
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > ср, 13 февр. 2019 г. в 18:05, Ciprian Borodescu <
> ciprian.borode...@gmail.com
> > >:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:52 PM Thomas Weise  wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui <
> > > > asifdxtr...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Asif
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer <
> > > > > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find
> some
> > > time
> > > > > to
> > > > > > contribute!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Julian
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" <
> kmcgr...@apache.org
> > > >:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy,
> > > Coursera,
> > > > > > Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal
> incubator
> > > > > > podling.
> > > > > > I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > KAM
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kevin A. McGrail
> > > > > > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > > > > > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> > > <(703)%20798-0171>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B <
> > > > > vinayakum...@apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Vinay
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn <
> > > hz...@inovex.de
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Looking forward to work on this!
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Hans-Peter
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke <
> > > > > > lars.fran...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project
> in
> > > [1]
> > > > > and
> > > > > > [2].
> > > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a
> vote
> > > > to
> > > > > > accept
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache
> > > Incubator.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is
> a
> > > > > > majority vote.
> > > > > > > > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member
> > > votes
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > binding.
> > > > > > > > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could
> add a
> > > > > comment
> > > > > > > stating
> > > > > > > > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect
> to
> > > > keep
> > > > > > it open
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > > > > > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > because
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the
> past
> > > > > > discussions!
> > > > > > > > > Lars
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1] <
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [2] <
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [3] <
> > > > > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TrainingProposal#preview>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [4] <
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>

Re: [Cava] Suitable name search

2019-02-13 Thread Anu Engineer

I would like to suggest “Jal”, in reference to Indra’s net (or Indra jal) 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra%27s_net

From the link:
"Imagine a multidimensional spider's web in the early morning covered with dew 
drops. And every dew drop contains the reflection of all the other dew drops. 
And, in each reflected dew drop, the reflections of all the other dew drops in 
that reflection. And so ad infinitum. That is the Buddhist conception of the 
universe in an image." –Alan Watts[1]

And for what it is worth, it is the ultimate connected chain or graph (

--Anu





On 2/13/19, 10:58 AM, "Antoine Toulme"  wrote:

Hello all,

As discussed previously, Cava is not a proper name for the proposal 
discussed last week on this list and published to the wiki [0].

I humbly would like to ask the community for feedback and proposals on a 
suitable name for this proposal, in line with the guidelines [1].

In preparation for this search, I have put together a list of names:

- Rainbow (after the name of my kid’s favorite toy, and in line with the 
crypto community unicorn punk theme [2].
- Winch (a mechanical device used to wind up or wind out wires (Wikipedia) 
, in the chain theme)
- Sprocket (a profiled wheel with teeth, or cogs, that mesh with a chain, 
track or other perforated or indented material. (Wikipedia), in the chain theme 
as well)

I have researched those names lightly and I have not seen them used heavily 
by an open source project in crypto. I followed the guidelines to search across 
different open source communities.

Please provide your own proposal and let’s work together towards a rough 
consensus. If one of the proposals above registers, please let us know as well.

Cheers,

Antoine

[0]: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CavaProposal
[1]: https://incubator.apache.org/guides/names.html 

[2]: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=unicorn%20punk


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

[Cava] Suitable name search

2019-02-13 Thread Antoine Toulme

Hello all,

As discussed previously, Cava is not a proper name for the proposal discussed 
last week on this list and published to the wiki [0].

I humbly would like to ask the community for feedback and proposals on a 
suitable name for this proposal, in line with the guidelines [1].

In preparation for this search, I have put together a list of names:

- Rainbow (after the name of my kid’s favorite toy, and in line with the crypto 
community unicorn punk theme [2].
- Winch (a mechanical device used to wind up or wind out wires (Wikipedia) , in 
the chain theme)
- Sprocket (a profiled wheel with teeth, or cogs, that mesh with a chain, track 
or other perforated or indented material. (Wikipedia), in the chain theme as 
well)

I have researched those names lightly and I have not seen them used heavily by 
an open source project in crypto. I followed the guidelines to search across 
different open source communities.

Please provide your own proposal and let’s work together towards a rough 
consensus. If one of the proposals above registers, please let us know as well.

Cheers,

Antoine

[0]: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CavaProposal
[1]: https://incubator.apache.org/guides/names.html 

[2]: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=unicorn%20punk

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Bernd Fondermann

[X] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator (binding)

   Bernd

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

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Felix Cheung

+1

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:23 AM Matt Sicker  wrote:

> +1
>
> Would be interesting if this project includes training for developing
> Apache projects in any way, or would that make more sense under ComDev
> or some other project?
>
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 09:09, Dmitriy Pavlov  wrote:
> >
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > ср, 13 февр. 2019 г. в 18:05, Ciprian Borodescu <
> ciprian.borode...@gmail.com
> > >:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:52 PM Thomas Weise  wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui <
> > > > asifdxtr...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > Asif
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer <
> > > > > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find
> some
> > > time
> > > > > to
> > > > > > contribute!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Julian
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" <
> kmcgr...@apache.org
> > > >:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy,
> > > Coursera,
> > > > > > Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal
> incubator
> > > > > > podling.
> > > > > > I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > KAM
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Kevin A. McGrail
> > > > > > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > > > > > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> > > <(703)%20798-0171>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B <
> > > > > vinayakum...@apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Vinay
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn <
> > > hz...@inovex.de
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Looking forward to work on this!
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Hans-Peter
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke <
> > > > > > lars.fran...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project
> in
> > > [1]
> > > > > and
> > > > > > [2].
> > > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a
> vote
> > > > to
> > > > > > accept
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache
> > > Incubator.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is
> a
> > > > > > majority vote.
> > > > > > > > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member
> > > votes
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > binding.
> > > > > > > > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could
> add a
> > > > > comment
> > > > > > > stating
> > > > > > > > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect
> to
> > > > keep
> > > > > > it open
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > > > > > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > because
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the
> past
> > > > > > discussions!
> > > > > > > > > Lars
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [1] <
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [2] <
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [3] <
> > > > > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TrainingProposal#preview>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [4] <
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> > > > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Guidelines for distribution of incubating artefacts on other platforms

2019-02-13 Thread Myrle Krantz

Weex Mentor here.  Answers inline:

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:36 AM Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > We distribute artefacts through *CocoaPods*

I'm with Justin: I'm not familiar with this either, but my first skim
across their information doesn't indicate they'd be fundamentally different
than the other distribution methods.  Would you like write access to the
instructions so that you can add them?

> > and *Gradle* channel

Do you mean maven here?  These lines in gradle:

dependencies {
...
// weex sdk and fastjson

compile 'com.taobao.android:weex_sdk:0.18.0@aar'
}

draw from a maven repository.

Maven is listed in our instructions.

> Does this mean that we need a vote even for distribution of unreleased
> > material ?
>
> You are not allowed to distribute unreleased material outside the
> developer community. [1] I would read that as users being outside the
> developer community.
>

I would reserve judgement here.  If it's a limited circle of users who are
consistently QAing your stuff, I'd see them as contributors to the
project.  In this case, you should also consider making these people
committers.  They are important to the success of your project.

> > Incubator-weex had used unofficial release without vote to get quick
> > feedback from users before we knew it could break the rule of Apache
> > release. *According to my understanding, any format of release on any
> > platform needs a vote even if it is unofficial, snapshot, nightly build
> and
> > etc..* Correct me if I am wrong.
>
> Well a snapshots shot or nightly may be OK if it a) not use as a
> substitute for not voting b) clearly marked so a user wouldn’t assume it a
> release and c) not placed in the main place user go to to get it. I would
> guess that the above doesn’t qualify but check with your mentors.
>

Users can be involved in your QA process.  If select users are downloading
your stuff and giving feedback, that's fine.  However if you've  been
advertising your stuff more broadly (for example by referencing unreleased
versions it in your getting started guide), you've been "breaking the
rules".

If that's the case, I'm fairly certain you didn't intend to.  So it should
be easy to fix.  In the case of the website example: just revert the
website examples to reference properly released versions.

If you have any questions, I'm here to help.

Best Regards,
Myrle
Weex Mentor

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Matt Sicker

+1

Would be interesting if this project includes training for developing
Apache projects in any way, or would that make more sense under ComDev
or some other project?

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 09:09, Dmitriy Pavlov  wrote:
>
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> ср, 13 февр. 2019 г. в 18:05, Ciprian Borodescu  >:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:52 PM Thomas Weise  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui <
> > > asifdxtr...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Asif
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer <
> > > > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some
> > time
> > > > to
> > > > > contribute!
> > > > >
> > > > > Julian
> > > > >
> > > > > Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail"  > >:
> > > > >
> > > > > +1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy,
> > Coursera,
> > > > > Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator
> > > > > podling.
> > > > > I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > KAM
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kevin A. McGrail
> > > > > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > > > > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> > <(703)%20798-0171>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B <
> > > > vinayakum...@apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Vinay
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn <
> > hz...@inovex.de
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Looking forward to work on this!
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Hans-Peter
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke <
> > > > > lars.fran...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in
> > [1]
> > > > and
> > > > > [2].
> > > > > > The
> > > > > > > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote
> > > to
> > > > > accept
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache
> > Incubator.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a
> > > > > majority vote.
> > > > > > > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member
> > votes
> > > > are
> > > > > > binding.
> > > > > > > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a
> > > > comment
> > > > > > stating
> > > > > > > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to
> > > keep
> > > > > it open
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > > > > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > because
> > > > > ...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past
> > > > > discussions!
> > > > > > > > Lars
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] <
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [2] <
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [3] <
> > > > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TrainingProposal#preview>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [4] <
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >



-- 
Matt Sicker

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Dmitriy Pavlov

+1 (non-binding)

ср, 13 февр. 2019 г. в 18:05, Ciprian Borodescu :

> +1
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:52 PM Thomas Weise  wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui <
> > asifdxtr...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Asif
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer <
> > > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some
> time
> > > to
> > > > contribute!
> > > >
> > > > Julian
> > > >
> > > > Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail"  >:
> > > >
> > > > +1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy,
> Coursera,
> > > > Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator
> > > > podling.
> > > > I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > KAM
> > > > --
> > > > Kevin A. McGrail
> > > > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > > > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> <(703)%20798-0171>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B <
> > > vinayakum...@apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 (binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > -Vinay
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn <
> hz...@inovex.de
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Looking forward to work on this!
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Hans-Peter
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke <
> > > > lars.fran...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in
> [1]
> > > and
> > > > [2].
> > > > > The
> > > > > > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote
> > to
> > > > accept
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache
> Incubator.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a
> > > > majority vote.
> > > > > > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member
> votes
> > > are
> > > > > binding.
> > > > > > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a
> > > comment
> > > > > stating
> > > > > > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to
> > keep
> > > > it open
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > > > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > because
> > > > ...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past
> > > > discussions!
> > > > > > > Lars
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] <
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [2] <
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [3] <
> > > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TrainingProposal#preview>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [4] <
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > -
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Ciprian Borodescu

+1

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:52 PM Thomas Weise  wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui <
> asifdxtr...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > Regards
> > Asif
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer <
> > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some time
> > to
> > > contribute!
> > >
> > > Julian
> > >
> > > Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" :
> > >
> > > +1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy, Coursera,
> > > Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator
> > > podling.
> > > I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > KAM
> > > --
> > > Kevin A. McGrail
> > > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B <
> > vinayakum...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (binding)
> > > >
> > > > -Vinay
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn  >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > > >
> > > > > Looking forward to work on this!
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Hans-Peter
> > > > >
> > > > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke <
> > > lars.fran...@gmail.com>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1]
> > and
> > > [2].
> > > > The
> > > > > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > > > > >
> > > > > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote
> to
> > > accept
> > > > the
> > > > > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a
> > > majority vote.
> > > > > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes
> > are
> > > > binding.
> > > > > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a
> > comment
> > > > stating
> > > > > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to
> keep
> > > it open
> > > > > for
> > > > > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> because
> > > ...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past
> > > discussions!
> > > > > > Lars
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] <
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [2] <
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [3] <
> > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TrainingProposal#preview>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [4] <
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > -
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Liang Chen

Hi

+1(binding).

Regards
Liang

Thomas Weise wrote
> +1 (binding)
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui 

> asifdxtreme@

> 
> wrote:
> 
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> Regards
>> Asif
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer <
>> 

> j.feinauer@

>> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 (non-binding)
>> > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some time
>> to
>> > contribute!
>> >
>> > Julian
>> >
>> > Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" 

> kmcgrail@

> :
>> >
>> > +1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy, Coursera,
>> > Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator
>> > podling.
>> > I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > KAM
>> > --
>> > Kevin A. McGrail
>> > Member, Apache Software Foundation
>> > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
>> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B <
>> 

> vinayakumarb@

>> > >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1 (binding)
>> > >
>> > > -Vinay
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn 

> hzorn@

> 
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > +1 (non-binding)
>> > > >
>> > > > Looking forward to work on this!
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Hans-Peter
>> > > >
>> > > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke <
>> > 

> lars.francke@

>>:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Hi everyone,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1]
>> and
>> > [2].
>> > > The
>> > > > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
>> > > > >
>> > > > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote
>> to
>> > accept
>> > > the
>> > > > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a
>> > majority vote.
>> > > > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes
>> are
>> > > binding.
>> > > > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a
>> comment
>> > > stating
>> > > > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to
>> keep
>> > it open
>> > > > for
>> > > > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
>> > > > > [ ] +0 Abstain
>> > > > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator
>> because
>> > ...
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past
>> > discussions!
>> > > > > Lars
>> > > > >
>> > > > > [1] <
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > [2] <
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > [3] <
>> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TrainingProposal#preview>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > [4] <
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
>> > > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > -
>> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: 

> general-unsubscribe@.apache

>> > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
>> 

> general-help@.apache

>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>





--
Sent from: http://apache-incubator-general.996316.n3.nabble.com/

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

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Thomas Weise

+1 (binding)


On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui 
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> Regards
> Asif
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer <
> j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some time
> to
> > contribute!
> >
> > Julian
> >
> > Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" :
> >
> > +1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy, Coursera,
> > Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator
> > podling.
> > I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.
> >
> > Regards,
> > KAM
> > --
> > Kevin A. McGrail
> > Member, Apache Software Foundation
> > Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B <
> vinayakum...@apache.org
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (binding)
> > >
> > > -Vinay
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non-binding)
> > > >
> > > > Looking forward to work on this!
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Hans-Peter
> > > >
> > > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke <
> > lars.fran...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1]
> and
> > [2].
> > > The
> > > > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > > > >
> > > > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to
> > accept
> > > the
> > > > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
> > > > >
> > > > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a
> > majority vote.
> > > > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes
> are
> > > binding.
> > > > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a
> comment
> > > stating
> > > > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > > > >
> > > > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep
> > it open
> > > > for
> > > > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > > > >
> > > > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because
> > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past
> > discussions!
> > > > > Lars
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > [2] <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > [3] <
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TrainingProposal#preview>
> > > > >
> > > > > [4] <
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > -
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Mohammad Asif Siddiqui

+1 (binding)

Regards
Asif

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer <
j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
> I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some time to
> contribute!
>
> Julian
>
> Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" :
>
> +1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy, Coursera,
> Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator
> podling.
> I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.
>
> Regards,
> KAM
> --
> Kevin A. McGrail
> Member, Apache Software Foundation
> Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B  >
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > -Vinay
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn 
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding)
> > >
> > > Looking forward to work on this!
> > > Thanks,
> > > Hans-Peter
> > >
> > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke <
> lars.fran...@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and
> [2].
> > The
> > > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > > >
> > > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to
> accept
> > the
> > > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
> > > >
> > > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a
> majority vote.
> > > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are
> > binding.
> > > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment
> > stating
> > > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > > >
> > > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep
> it open
> > > for
> > > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because
> ...
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past
> discussions!
> > > > Lars
> > > >
> > > > [1] <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > [2] <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > [3] 
> > > >
> > > > [4] <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Julian Feinauer

+1 (non-binding)
I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some time to 
contribute!

Julian

Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" :

+1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy, Coursera,
Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator podling.
I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.

Regards,
KAM
--
Kevin A. McGrail
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171


On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B 
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> -Vinay
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn  wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Looking forward to work on this!
> > Thanks,
> > Hans-Peter
> >
> > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke :
> > >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2].
> The
> > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > >
> > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept
> the
> > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
> > >
> > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a majority 
vote.
> > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are
> binding.
> > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment
> stating
> > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > >
> > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep it open
> > for
> > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because ...
> > >
> > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past discussions!
> > > Lars
> > >
> > > [1] <
> > >
> >
> 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > >>
> > >
> > > [2] <
> > >
> >
> 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > >>
> > >
> > > [3] 
> > >
> > > [4] <
> > >
> >
> 
https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> > >>
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Kevin A. McGrail

+1 Binding.  I'll also try again to get  Udacity, Udemy, Coursera,
Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator podling.
I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help.

Regards,
KAM
--
Kevin A. McGrail
Member, Apache Software Foundation
Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin Project
https://www.linkedin.com/in/kmcgrail - 703.798.0171


On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:00 AM Vinayakumar B 
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> -Vinay
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn  wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > Looking forward to work on this!
> > Thanks,
> > Hans-Peter
> >
> > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke :
> > >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2].
> The
> > > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> > >
> > > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept
> the
> > > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
> > >
> > > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a majority vote.
> > > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are
> binding.
> > > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment
> stating
> > > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> > >
> > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep it open
> > for
> > > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> > >
> > > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because ...
> > >
> > > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past discussions!
> > > Lars
> > >
> > > [1] <
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > >>
> > >
> > > [2] <
> > >
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> > >>
> > >
> > > [3] 
> > >
> > > [4] <
> > >
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> > >>
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Vinayakumar B

+1 (binding)

-Vinay


On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Looking forward to work on this!
> Thanks,
> Hans-Peter
>
> > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke :
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The
> > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> >
> > According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the
> > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
> >
> > A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a majority vote.
> > Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are binding.
> > It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment stating
> > whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> >
> > This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep it open
> for
> > longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> >
> > [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> > [ ] +0 Abstain
> > [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because ...
> >
> > Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past discussions!
> > Lars
> >
> > [1] <
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> >>
> >
> > [2] <
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> >>
> >
> > [3] 
> >
> > [4] <
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> >>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Hans-Peter Zorn

+1 (non-binding)

Looking forward to work on this!
Thanks,
Hans-Peter

> Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke :
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The
> proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> 
> According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the
> new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
> 
> A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a majority vote.
> Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are binding.
> It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment stating
> whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> 
> This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep it open for
> longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> 
> [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> [ ] +0 Abstain
> [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because ...
> 
> Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past discussions!
> Lars
> 
> [1] <
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>> 
> 
> [2] <
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>> 
> 
> [3] 
> 
> [4] <
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
>> 


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

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Sharan F

+1 (binding)

Great work and am looking forward to being involved. :-)

Thanks
Sharan

On Wed, 13 Feb 2019, 08:58 Lars Francke,  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The
> proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
>
> According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the
> new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
>
> A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a majority vote.
> Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are binding.
> It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment stating
> whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
>
> This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep it open for
> longer). Please VOTE as follows:
>
> [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> [ ] +0 Abstain
> [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because ...
>
> Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past discussions!
> Lars
>
> [1] <
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> >
>
> [2] <
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> >
>
> [3] 
>
> [4] <
>
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Gosling Von

+1 binding,

It seems to be some overlapping duty with Apache Infra. Anyway, would be 
helpful for Apache Projects or external open source projects. Very looking 
forward to the further step :-)

Best Regards,
Von Gosling

> 在 2019年2月13日，下午3:57，Lars Francke  写道：
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The
> proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
> 
> According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the
> new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
> 
> A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a majority vote.
> Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are binding.
> It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment stating
> whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
> 
> This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep it open for
> longer). Please VOTE as follows:
> 
> [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> [ ] +0 Abstain
> [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because ...
> 
> Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past discussions!
> Lars
> 
> [1] <
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>> 
> 
> [2] <
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>> 
> 
> [3] 
> 
> [4] <
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
>> 


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

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Myrle Krantz

+1 (binding)

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:03 AM Christofer Dutz 
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> Chris
>
> Am 13.02.19, 08:58 schrieb "Lars Francke" :
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2].
> The
> proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
>
> According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept
> the
> new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.
>
> A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a majority vote.
> Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are
> binding.
> It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment
> stating
> whether your vote is binding or non-binding.
>
> This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep it open
> for
> longer). Please VOTE as follows:
>
> [ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
> [ ] +0 Abstain
> [ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because ...
>
> Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past discussions!
> Lars
>
> [1] <
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> >
>
> [2] <
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> >
>
> [3] 
>
> [4] <
>
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
> >
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding)

Chris

Am 13.02.19, 08:58 schrieb "Lars Francke" :

Hi everyone,

we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The
proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].

According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the
new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator.

A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator podling is a majority vote.
Everyone is welcome to vote, only Incubator PMC member votes are binding.
It would be helpful (but not required) if you could add a comment stating
whether your vote is binding or non-binding.

This vote will run for at least 72 hours (but I expect to keep it open for
longer). Please VOTE as follows:

[ ] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator
[ ] +0 Abstain
[ ] -1 Do not accept Training into the Apache Incubator because ...

Thank you for everyone who decided to join in in the past discussions!
Lars

[1] <

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5c00016b769135cc302bb2ce4e5f6bbfeeda933a07e9c38b5017d651@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>

[2] <

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9cb4d7eef73e0d526e0124944c3d37325aa892675351a1eed0a25de3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>

[3] 

[4] <

https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#approval_of_proposal_by_sponsor
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:58 AM Lars Francke  wrote:
> ...According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the
> new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator...

+1 and I'm copying the proposal here, we usually do this for archiving purposes.

-Bertrand

===
Training Proposal

Abstract

Apache Training aims to be a project dedicated to developing resources
which can be used for training purposes in various media formats,
languages and for various Apache and non-Apache target projects.

Disclaimer

In this proposal we refer to the “Training project” because initially
it was unclear whether this would be an Incubator project, a TLP
project or a central service. We decided to go the Incubator route.

This proposal is a bit different than most because it does mostly
start from scratch. So there are a few things yet undecided (e.g.
Github usage). We expect to discuss these issues as one of the first
things after establishing this project.

Proposal

The purpose of the Training project is to create high-quality training
material for various projects in an open source form. Up until now
everyone who wants to offer a Training course for one of the Apache
projects needs to create her or his own slides/labs and keep them
up-to-date. This is a significant investment of time and money. This
project aims to spread that burden and help all Apache projects as we
can create shared resources and we can also create cross-project
trainings.

To sum up, the main goals for this project:

Develop shared material that can be used for trainings

Cross-project
Focused on Apache but also 3rd party projects where it makes sense

Develop “labs” or “hands-on” exercises
Develop or document an infrastructure that can be used for those labs
Potentially develop tools to manage the material (e.g. a “slide”
repository that contains “modules” that can be easily reused and
combined)

These are non-goals for this project:

Some kind of official “Apache Training Program” with certifications etc.

Based on feedback and future developments this may change but we
believe it’s out of scope initially

Project documentation

The training material we develop is not necessarily self-explanatory.
It still benefits from an experienced instructor but it will make it
possible for talented people without the time and resources to develop
material to still train others.

Rationale

There are tons of companies offering training for and around the
Apache ecosystem. From our experience everyone is building a very
similar set of slides and labs (there’s only so many ways you can
explain a concept). This project aims to create and use synergies. By
also bringing these resources closer to their origin we hope to
improve quality, freshness of the content and versatility (e.g. more
language options).

It is the mission of the Apache foundation “to provide software for
the public good” and we believe this project can help with that
mission by making the software more accessible for a broader audience.

Initial Goals

The initial goal for the first few weeks or months is to have
discussions and agreements on various scoping and technical issues as
well as integrating existing donated material.

After that we want to start building a library of content.

Current Status

This is a bootstrapped project. While there is some initial material
to contribute there are no processes, no community and no decisions
yet.

Meritocracy

We value meritocracy and we understand that it is the basis for an
open community that encourages multiple companies and individuals to
contribute and be invested in the project’s future. We will encourage
and monitor participation and make sure to extend privileges and
responsibilities to interested contributors.

This project will differ from most other Apache projects in that its
focus is not on “source code” in the traditional form but in
“content”. This is not totally unprecedented (e.g. Infra, Conferences,
Marketing, Legal, Brand, etc. are all services within the ASF) and
fully within the goals of the Apache Foundation.

Community

As this is a new bootstrapped project there is no existing community
to build on. Based on initial feedback from the mailing list and
discussions with various companies there is however a broad interest
in collaborating in this area so we hope that a new community will
quickly grow and establish.

Core Developers

This proposal originated as an idea from people from the two companies
inovex and OpenCore which are listed below as initial committers but
we hope to gather more (even during the discussion of this project
itself).

Alignment

The Training project is purely an “integration” project aiming to
support all other Apache projects. There might be some overlap with
the Community central service as well as the newly established
“Design/Creative” central service.

Known Risks

Orphaned products

As this establishes a brand new project there is no history to look

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Furkan KAMACI

Hi,

+1 (binding).

I'm excited for this too!

Kind Regards,
Furkan KAMACI

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:38 AM Lars Francke 
wrote:

> I'll also add my +1 (binding)
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:25 AM Sönke Liebau
>  wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding) excited about moving this forward! :)
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > +1 (binding) woking forward to being involved.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Justin
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sönke Liebau
> > Partner
> > Tel. +49 179 7940878
> > OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - Germany
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Lars Francke

I'll also add my +1 (binding)

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:25 AM Sönke Liebau
 wrote:

> +1 (non-binding) excited about moving this forward! :)
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > +1 (binding) woking forward to being involved.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
>
> --
> Sönke Liebau
> Partner
> Tel. +49 179 7940878
> OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - Germany
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

2019-02-13 Thread Sönke Liebau

+1 (non-binding) excited about moving this forward! :)

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> +1 (binding) woking forward to being involved.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>


-- 
Sönke Liebau
Partner
Tel. +49 179 7940878
OpenCore GmbH & Co. KG - Thomas-Mann-Straße 8 - 22880 Wedel - Germany

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

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator