Re: [VOTE] Apche Ignite PMC Chair Election

On 2016-12-10 21:24 (+0100), Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > According to the discussion on the dev list [1], the following candidates > were proposed for the Apache Ignite PMC Chair position: > > Vladimir Ozerov > Konstantin Boudnik > Valentin Kulichenko > Denis Magda >

Re: Switching back to review-then-commit process

On 05.03.2016 04:43, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > It saddens me to see this coming to it ;( Yeah. You guys are introducing red tape that's a barrier for new committers and a bureaucratic trap for everyone else. For example: what happens when a module owner takes off for a couple months? Which is

Re: Ignite Voting Process

On 30.12.2015 16:30, Raul Kripalani wrote: > Hi Anton, > > Why don't we publish artifacts for ignite-geospatial, ignite-hibernate and > ignite-schedule? The lgpl profile is not triggered in these instructions, > and these artifacts cease existing in Maven Central 1.2.0-incubating > onwards. > > I

Re: Ignite Voting Process

On 31.12.2015 09:58, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 30.12.2015 16:30, Raul Kripalani wrote: >> Hi Anton, >> >> Why don't we publish artifacts for ignite-geospatial, ignite-hibernate and >> ignite-schedule? The lgpl profile is not triggered in these instructions, >> a

Re: EA versioning

It was fun watching this thread. I don't even know what EA means, but I have to wonder ... what's wrong with releasing 1.5.0-beta? Or does the Java world need its own special terminology for yet another well-established process? :) -- Brane

Re: Branch deletion prohibited

On 23.11.2015 04:13, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 02:16PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: >> Cos, >> >> I believe this is the ticket: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-10798 >> >> This policy does seem myopic, would be great if Ignite could get an >> exemption. >

Re: Branch deletion prohibited

On 23.11.2015 20:41, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 09:08AM, Branko Čibej wrote: >> On 23.11.2015 04:13, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: >>> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 02:16PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: >>>> Cos, >>>> >>>> I beli

Re: MSDN subscriptions for ASF Committers

On 16.10.2015 09:48, Raul Kripalani wrote: > According to the feedback of other fellow committers, they can take weeks > to approve it (!). When did you apply? Just found this thread ... indeed, it can take weeks or even months. At some point, the subscriptions were bulk-updated every 6 months.

Re: Why portable marshaller handle Date and Timestamp in the same way?

On 06.10.2015 12:26, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Yakov, this could work in .Net where you have real generics. But it will > not work in Java in general case due to type erasure - you simply cannot > infer the type. > > Let's look closely to this: > Date Java: 10^-3 > Timestamp Java: 10^-9 >

Re: Fwd: Coding Guidelines: zookeeper IP finder and mqtt streamer

On 29.09.2015 00:41, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > Hmm... > > Negligence, n. : the trait of neglecting responsibilities and lacking concern > syn : omission, oversight "Negligence" usually means continued and repeated (non-)action. In that respect it's an extremely negative label to use; you're

Re: Let's please fix the mess in Git

Stop. Right. There. If you're going to start pointing fingers at people you can just shut down the project because you're going down the road of petty bickering. That's a great way to dissolve the community into chaos. On the topic of git usage: * Raul is absolutely right about commit

Re: LGPL in 1.4 examples

On 30.09.2015 10:28, Sergey Kozlov wrote: > Could we build these modules during building example project? It seems a > bit excessively from user standpoint. Why do you think users are dumb and lazy and can't issue two build commands instead of one? > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:45 A

Re: Introducing "compatibility level" concept.

On 30.09.2015 09:51, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: > Igniters, > > Normally we are trying to maintain backward compatibility with previous > versions. But it is not always possible. > > E.g. we are about to release portable protocol. There are lots suggestions > how to optimize it, but all of them are

Re: LGPL in 1.4 examples

On 30.09.2015 09:29, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Sergey Kozlov wrote: > >> I filed the ticket: >> Build examples failed from binary fabric package >> >> > > I think the reason is that we do

Re: Introducing "compatibility level" concept.

sk using A-protocol; > 4) Cluster shuts down. > 5) Several new B-nodes appear, but have no clue that something was > persisted using A-protocol. They decide to use B-protocol. > 6) Node A restarts and meets unknown B-protocol. > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Branko Čibej <br..

Re: LGPL in 1.4 examples

On 30.09.2015 10:30, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 30.09.2015 09:29, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Sergey Kozlov <skoz...@gridgain.com> >> wro

Re: what is "communication encryption"?

On 30.09.2015 11:18, Nikolay Tikhonov wrote: > SslContextFactory allows to set different encryption protocols (by default > TLS). I think that just "ssl" confuses users. Might be "ssl\tls=off" more > acceptable? SSL is one (rather old) specification of Transport Layer Security (TLS). These days,

Re: Update version for master

On 03.09.2015 13:47, Raul Kripalani wrote: > If development of the 1.4.x release line will continue in the ignite-1.4 > branch, the master/develop branch should carry 1.5.0-SNAPSHOT (or > 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT, depending on the type of changes expected). > > BTW - it seems the tag for ignite-1.4.0 is

Re: Ignite Teamcity at Apache side

On 03.09.2015 15:11, Anton Vinogradov wrote: > Hello, > > As you may know we already have Ignite Teamcity server where contributors > can check it's patches. But, as Cos said before, this test environment > should be runned under apache hardware. > > Apache test environment based on Jenkins, but

Re: Update version for master

On 03.09.2015 14:29, Raul Kripalani wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: > >> There hasn't been a 1.4.0 release package yet, so of course no tag? >> > Well, that would explain it ;-) But why is the POM version for both maste

Re: SVN changes

On 02.09.2015 09:27, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 02.09.2015 03:26, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: >>> Brane, >>> >>> Since recently I am constantly asked to confirm an SVN

Re: SVN changes

On 02.09.2015 11:29, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 02.09.2015 09:27, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> On 02.09.2015 03:26, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: >>>> Brane, >>>> >&

Re: Ignite 1.4

On 01.09.2015 20:46, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 08:45PM, Sergey Kozlov wrote: >> FYI: We've at least 161 unclosed issues planned to fix in version 1.4 > If there're so many issues to go - perhaps it makes sense not to branch out > this early to avoid extra merges? Or

Download page on the Ignite website

Guys, I just updated the download page magic because Infra made a major change in the way download scripts work last night. As I was doing this, I noticed that someone ripped out the logic that made the site offer downloads from our closest mirror instead of *straight out of the repository*.

Re: API stability.

On 29.08.2015 00:06, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 05:14PM, Vladimir Ozerov wrote: Dima, I'm not suggesting doing this, they are already not stable. For example, take a look at IgniteCacheObjectProcessor. This is a component which can be injected through plugins, thus it

Re: I would like to work on the jira IGNITE-1226

On 24.08.2015 20:54, Ken Cheng wrote: Hi devs, please add my email address kcheng@gmail.com to the dev subscription list. Why don't you just subscribe? Instructions are here: http://ignite.apache.org/community/resources.html#mail-lists -- Brane