There are 3 binding approving votes and 2 non-binding votes, all of which
are following:
binding votes:
- John D. Ament
- Henry Saputra
- Justin Mclean
non-binding votes:
- Ivam Firestone
- Jia Zhai
There are no disapproving votes.
We will proceed with this release as staged.
Thanks everyone
Thank you all. Can any IPMC member help review and vote this?
Sijie
On Apr 19, 2017 4:47 AM, "Jia Zhai" wrote:
> +1(non-binding)
> - verified packages (md5, asc and sha1 all look good)
> - the source package build and test all run successfully.
> - NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, License headers look good.
+1(non-binding)
- verified packages (md5, asc and sha1 all look good)
- the source package build and test all run successfully.
- NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, License headers look good.
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 8:36 PM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> +1 to release
>
> - NOTICE file looks fine
> - Source headers l
+1 to release
- NOTICE file looks fine
- Source headers look correct
- DISCLAIMER present.
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 2:55 AM Sijie Guo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please review and vote on the release candidate #4 for the Apache
> DistributedLog version 0.4.0-incubating, as follows:
>
> [ ] +1, Approve
Awesome. I learned a lot from this discussion. We will address these
comments and call another vote.
- Sijie
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Marvin Humphrey
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra
> wrote:
> > The question is whether we need to keep this section:
> >
> > Porti
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:06 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Agreed, however this is where it gets complicated (and at least needs to be
> clear to the contributors, or maybe I'm the only one thinking this is
> confusing/not obvious). The ASF accepts contributions from individuals,
> not companies.
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 7:24 PM Josh Elser wrote:
> Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra
> wrote:
> >> The question is whether we need to keep this section:
> >>
> >> Portions of this software were developed by Twitter.
> >> Copyright Twitter, 2017
> >>
> >> i
Thanks for the review guys, will come back to dev@ list to update the
release artifacts.
- Henry
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The question is whether we need to keep this section:
Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
The question is whether we need to keep this section:
Portions of this software were developed by Twitter.
Copyright Twitter, 2017
in the NOTICE file. Since Twitter already signed off the source
contributions, we cou
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
> The question is whether we need to keep this section:
>
> Portions of this software were developed by Twitter.
> Copyright Twitter, 2017
>
> in the NOTICE file. Since Twitter already signed off the source
> contributions, we could probably re
The question is whether we need to keep this section:
Portions of this software were developed by Twitter.
Copyright Twitter, 2017
in the NOTICE file. Since Twitter already signed off the source
contributions, we could probably remove this section.
As for initial Copyright notice, we should put
Thank you, Josh. Will address your comments.
On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> -1 (binding) your source releases still do not contain the DISCLAIMER file
> that John pointed out in rc2 [1].
>
> * mvn apache-rat:check fails on `src/main/resources/DISCLAIMER.bin.txt`
* Don't inc
-1 (binding) your source releases still do not contain the DISCLAIMER
file that John pointed out in rc2 [1].
* mvn apache-rat:check fails on `src/main/resources/DISCLAIMER.bin.txt`
* Don't include 'Copyright 2017 The Apache Software Foundation' in the
license headers of your source files. The N
Gotcha. Cancelling the vote. Will address the concerns in new RC.
Thanks John!
- Sijie
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 5:46 PM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:27 PM Sijie Guo wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 6:06 AM, John D. Ament
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Its not clear if you inten
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:27 PM Sijie Guo wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 6:06 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
> > Its not clear if you intended this to be the IPMC vote or the dev vote.
> >
>
> Sorry. it is my first time doing incubator project release. If I made
> something wrong, please let me
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 6:06 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> Its not clear if you intended this to be the IPMC vote or the dev vote.
>
Sorry. it is my first time doing incubator project release. If I made
something wrong, please let me know.
This is vote is intended to for the IPMC vote.
>
> -1 Si
Its not clear if you intended this to be the IPMC vote or the dev vote.
-1 Since the release does not include the DISCLAIMER file and README does
not include the DISCLAIMER text (either would be fine per policy, but
generally we look for DISCLAIMER).
There were no binaries in the source. NOTICE
17 matches
Mail list logo
