Re: [MENTORS] Podling reports this month
Hi, > Why is the report without apache shenyu? ShenYu is in group 1 which reports in January, April, July and October. Kind Regards, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [MENTORS] Podling reports this month
Hi Justin, Why is the report without apache shenyu? thanks Justin Mclean 于2021年11月7日周日 上午7:48写道: > > Hi, > > The report can be found in the usual place: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/November2021 > > Kind Regards, > Justin > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [MENTORS] Download page issues
Hi Justin, Thanks for your script. ShenYu has fixed the issue according to the prompt from the script. -- Zhang Yonglun Apache ShenYu (Incubating) Apache ShardingSphere Justin Mclean 于2021年11月5日周五 上午7:08写道: > Hi, > > The script i used to check teh download pages is here if anyone is > interested. [1] > > Kind Regards, > Justin > > 1. https://github.com/justinmclean/ReleaseChecker > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
Hi, Ya, you’re right :) +1 (non-binding) Compiled on Arm M1 Compiled on Windows Licenses checked (rat) Checksum checked Incubation in name ASF headers > On 7. Nov 2021, at 12:34, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > I’ll also note that Alexander’s vote is non binding, best practice to > indicate it as such like so “+1 (non-binding)”. It also a good idea to list > what was checked in the release rather than just voting “+1". Only IPMC > members votes are binding on ASF incubator releases. > > Kind Regards, > Justin > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
Hi, The issue has been described in detail multiple times. If you don’t understand please talk to you mentors and they can help. Kind Regards, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
Hi, I’ll also note that Alexander’s vote is non binding, best practice to indicate it as such like so “+1 (non-binding)”. It also a good idea to list what was checked in the release rather than just voting “+1". Only IPMC members votes are binding on ASF incubator releases. Kind Regards, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
Hi, I don’t understand what is the current problem because what was “copied” was the image that was transcripts to OUR representation. Then the element that can be claimed as “copied” is the information inside of the OUR representation. When we change the content of the graph the Wikipedia license stop applying because the graph is totally new and its not related to the previous one. If you are requesting to change our representation/or change the way to provide the input to the test, we can do it, but for me it doesn’t make any sense. Because the content that was “copied” is not there any more. Also as Daniel mentioned the element claim as copied is an image that in current code does not exist any reference to it, and obviously the code looks similar because we are using OUR representation of the graph. On Sun 7. Nov 2021 at 11:24, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > Agree with Daniel, the node creation is a common technique in the data > science community and does not represent code, it is representing a > procedure to create nodes. Therefore the use of this procedure seems > compliant. > > IMO it is not compliant with ASF policy, no matter how common this > practice may be in the data science community. ASF policy covers more than > just code. > > Kind Regards, > Justin > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
Hi, Honestly I don’t get it. Same techniques are used in Apache Spark and Apache Flink, as example. How’s that working? We referenced the Wikipedia article as a documentation how page rank works. Why should this violate the ASF policy? The algorithm looks exactly as is it is [1], means the only fix would be _not_to use it? 1 - https://towardsdatascience.com/pagerank-algorithm-fully-explained-dc794184b4af Best, —Alex > On 7. Nov 2021, at 11:24, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > >> Agree with Daniel, the node creation is a common technique in the data >> science community and does not represent code, it is representing a >> procedure to create nodes. Therefore the use of this procedure seems >> compliant. > > IMO it is not compliant with ASF policy, no matter how common this practice > may be in the data science community. ASF policy covers more than just code. > > Kind Regards, > Justin > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
Hi, > Agree with Daniel, the node creation is a common technique in the data > science community and does not represent code, it is representing a procedure > to create nodes. Therefore the use of this procedure seems compliant. IMO it is not compliant with ASF policy, no matter how common this practice may be in the data science community. ASF policy covers more than just code. Kind Regards, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
+1 PR for the NOTICE [1] includes the changes Justin suggested, will be fixed in the next release. Agree with Daniel, the node creation is a common technique in the data science community and does not represent code, it is representing a procedure to create nodes. Therefore the use of this procedure seems compliant. 1 - https://github.com/apache/incubator-wayang/pull/37 > On 7. Nov 2021, at 08:58, Daniel Widdis wrote: > > Generally in agreement, but: > >> given there may be a license issue and it's very easy to fix, why not fix it? > > Any "fix" will look like the old code and thus be "modified". > > The new graph in this case happens to have the same number of nodes and arcs > as the original copyrighted artwork, but arranged in a completely different > way. Your position seems to be this might not "fix" the problem. > > I think we are all in agreement that a randomly generated set of nodes and > arcs would be compliant, even if the code still looks similar. > > > On 11/6/21, 11:40 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote: > >Hi, > >> And sure, the image labeled with B and C is based on the non-labeled image >> with smiley faces, so I'll concede that image, and even the exact network it >> represents, may fall under CC-BY-SA, and thus it was correct to remove the >> old code. > >This main issue I think as the old code wasn’t replaced but modified. > Modified stuff in general keeps the same license the original. That may apply > here, but I’m not 100% sure, but I don’t think it a serious issue. But given > there may be a license issue and it's very easy to fix, why not fix it? Also > other IPMC members can still vote +1 and this become a release, but I suggest > the project fixes it in a future release. If you had used teh WIP progress > disclaimer I would have votes +1 and suggested that. > >> Are you asserting that any directed graph is CC-BY-SA licensed? If not, >> what is the threshold for difference that you would accept? > >I would assume not, but you'd need to get actually legal advice to regards > what the threshold would be. As is every user of this software may need to > seek that advice in order to use it without that risk. The risk could be > minimal or nonexistent, but IANAL it's best IMO to err on the side of caution > with stuff like this. > >> Would it be acceptable to generate a completely random graph using [1] and >> represent that in the code? > >Sure, but so would one that the project came up with itself that wasn’t > based on another one, or one that was under compatible license. > >Kind Regards, >Justin >- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
Generally in agreement, but: > given there may be a license issue and it's very easy to fix, why not fix it? Any "fix" will look like the old code and thus be "modified". The new graph in this case happens to have the same number of nodes and arcs as the original copyrighted artwork, but arranged in a completely different way. Your position seems to be this might not "fix" the problem. I think we are all in agreement that a randomly generated set of nodes and arcs would be compliant, even if the code still looks similar. On 11/6/21, 11:40 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote: Hi, > And sure, the image labeled with B and C is based on the non-labeled image with smiley faces, so I'll concede that image, and even the exact network it represents, may fall under CC-BY-SA, and thus it was correct to remove the old code. This main issue I think as the old code wasn’t replaced but modified. Modified stuff in general keeps the same license the original. That may apply here, but I’m not 100% sure, but I don’t think it a serious issue. But given there may be a license issue and it's very easy to fix, why not fix it? Also other IPMC members can still vote +1 and this become a release, but I suggest the project fixes it in a future release. If you had used teh WIP progress disclaimer I would have votes +1 and suggested that. > Are you asserting that any directed graph is CC-BY-SA licensed? If not, what is the threshold for difference that you would accept? I would assume not, but you'd need to get actually legal advice to regards what the threshold would be. As is every user of this software may need to seek that advice in order to use it without that risk. The risk could be minimal or nonexistent, but IANAL it's best IMO to err on the side of caution with stuff like this. > Would it be acceptable to generate a completely random graph using [1] and represent that in the code? Sure, but so would one that the project came up with itself that wasn’t based on another one, or one that was under compatible license. Kind Regards, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
Hi, > And sure, the image labeled with B and C is based on the non-labeled image > with smiley faces, so I'll concede that image, and even the exact network it > represents, may fall under CC-BY-SA, and thus it was correct to remove the > old code. This main issue I think as the old code wasn’t replaced but modified. Modified stuff in general keeps the same license the original. That may apply here, but I’m not 100% sure, but I don’t think it a serious issue. But given there may be a license issue and it's very easy to fix, why not fix it? Also other IPMC members can still vote +1 and this become a release, but I suggest the project fixes it in a future release. If you had used teh WIP progress disclaimer I would have votes +1 and suggested that. > Are you asserting that any directed graph is CC-BY-SA licensed? If not, what > is the threshold for difference that you would accept? I would assume not, but you'd need to get actually legal advice to regards what the threshold would be. As is every user of this software may need to seek that advice in order to use it without that risk. The risk could be minimal or nonexistent, but IANAL it's best IMO to err on the side of caution with stuff like this. > Would it be acceptable to generate a completely random graph using [1] and > represent that in the code? Sure, but so would one that the project came up with itself that wasn’t based on another one, or one that was under compatible license. Kind Regards, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Wayang (Incubating) 0.6.0-RC5
> It unclear what has been used from that page, there is text, code and images > on it all under different licenses. It's very clear to me. The code you linked to is simply a representation of what nodes link to what other nodes by a directed arc. For example, the top two sites labeled B and C point to each other. C doesn't point to anything else and isn't pointed to by anything other than B. The original network clearly directly matched the graphic including the labeling of the sites by letter and matching links. There is no code on the website which refers to this graphic in any way; in fact, the algorithm text elsewhere on the page refers to a simplified 4-node network with A, B, C, and D which doesn't match the image at all. > Assuming it is this just this image, then it is based on this image The "based on" is the linking of sites represented by arrows. For example, these two lines in the removed code represent the bidirectional link in the upper right of the image. new char[]{'B', 'C'}, new char[]{'C', 'B'}, Of note, C only connects to B, and is connected to by B. And sure, the image labeled with B and C is based on the non-labeled image with smiley faces, so I'll concede that image, and even the exact network it represents, may fall under CC-BY-SA, and thus it was correct to remove the old code. However, the PR changed to a different set of links, creating a different graph. As a quick proof, there is no node like C in the previous version which only has a single bidirectional link to another node, so it clearly does not represent the same graph. There may be some similarities, but how much of a difference is required? Are you asserting that any directed graph is CC-BY-SA licensed? If not, what is the threshold for difference that you would accept? Would it be acceptable to generate a completely random graph using [1] and represent that in the code? [1] - http://bl.ocks.org/erkal/9746513 On 11/6/21, 9:58 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote: Hi, It unclear what has been used from that page, there is text, code and images on it all under different licenses. In general content on wikipedia is not in the public domain and care needs to be taken with is use, also what “public domain” means varies. For how to treat public domain works in an ASF project please see [1]. It would need to mentioned in the LICENSE at a minimum. Assuming it is this just this image, then it is based on this image [2] which is in not public domain but CC-by-SA which complicates things. I did suggest that the project uses the WIP disclaimer which is a good idea until issue like this have been sorted out. Kind Regards, Justin 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#handling-public-domain-licensed-works 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PageRank-hi-res.png - 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