Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Geode (incubating)

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: > On 11/08/2016 11:14 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 11/07/2016 10:05 PM, Niall Pemb

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Geode (incubating)

On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > On 11/07/2016 10:05 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: >> >>> > I was looking at Snoot, and some figures jumped at me. >>> > >>> > Is the Podling (and

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Geode (incubating)

On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: > Hi! > > after a very positive discussion in the Geode community > and at the IPMC level: > http://markmail.org/message/z4prj62hr7rn6cu6 > I'd like to bring the following resolution for a

[VOTE] Graduate Apache Geode (incubating)

pe <jensde...@apache.org> * Jianxia Chen <jche...@apache.org> * Jinmei Liao <jinmeil...@apache.org> * John Blum <jxb...@apache.org> * Karen Miller <kmil...@apache.org> * Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> * Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> * Mark Bretl <m

Re: [DISCUSS] RocketMQ Incubation Proposal

The proposal looks fine in general, but I'm slightly concerned about: https://github.com/alibaba/RocketMQ/graphs/contributors It seems that the model so far has been -- through huge blobs of code over the wall. Given that the composition of initial committers is all from Alibaba I hope their

[DISCUSS] Graduate Apache Geode (incubating) as a TLP

> * Karen Miller <kmil...@apache.org> * Konstantin Boudnik <c...@apache.org> * Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> * Mark Bretl <mbr...@apache.org> * Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> * Niall Pemberton <nia...@apache.org> * Nitin Lamba <nla...@apache.org> * Roman Sh

Consider highlighting your podling at ApacheCON in Seville

Hi! with ApacheCON in Seville right around the corner chances are you've made your travel arrangements already. If you happen to be around the conference on Fri, November 18th, 16:30 - 17:20 why not use that time to highlight your favorite podling? https://s.apache.org/aceu2016_shark_tank

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Fineract 0.4.0 (incubating)

+1 (binding) One suggestion I'd like to make is that in order to faciliate license checks please consider integrating RAT checks similar to what Geode does: https://github.com/apache/incubator-geode/blob/develop/gradle/rat.gradle Thanks, Roman. On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Justin Mclean

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geode (incubating) 1.0.0-incubating

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Swapnil Bawaskar wrote: > Hello, > > This is a call for a vote on the Apache Geode (incubating) release > 1.0.0-incubating. > > This release candidate, 1.0.0-incubating.RC2, has successfully passed > a vote for a release > on the geode

Podling Shark Tank is coming to Seville near YOU!

Hi! Podling Shark is back and with 63 podlings to chose from http://incubator.apache.org/ everyone should consider giving a short pitch for a podling they are passionate about! If you're planning to attend ApacheCON in Seville please read through this and let us know (on the wiki or replying to

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ 2.0.0.0-incubating RC4

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:23 PM, Goden Yao wrote: > Hi IPMC, > > HAWQ community has voted and passed RC4 build. Previous IP issues have all > been fixed. > The Vote thread can be found: >

Re: [DISCUSS] Olympian Incubation Proposal

On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 8:05 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > Agree with you on all points, Taylor. > > And I am even quite surprised to see the number of people backing the > project, yet Apache is adamant to get involved. It feels a little bit like > the "Community over Code" and

Re: Apache Example project?

On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > Hi, > > There's been many discussions recently around what is the best practice for > git tagging, release procedures, licencing notes, web site publishing etc. > > The landscape is always changing as technologies and

Re: [VOTE] Accept NetBeans into the Apache Incubator

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Ate Douma wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Now that the discussion thread on the NetBeans Proposal has ended, > please vote on accepting NetBeans into the Apache Incubator. > > The ASF voting rules are described at: >

Re: Netbeans expectations (Was: Re: ASF doing too much? (Was: Re: TAC))

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > I would have assumed that if Netbeans stakeholders had any issues > or question, or requests for clarification, they would have > pinged either their champion or one of their proposed mentors. > > As it is, it is only on

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache PredictionIO 0.10.0 (incubating) RC4

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Donald Szeto wrote: > Hi Justin, > > Sounds good. Since a vote usually take 72 hours, is it okay in practice to > "pipeline them"? What I mean is to let the current IPMC vote sits here, > while the project PMC creates a new RC and start voting

Re: Radical proposal: no initial list of committers

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > >> For example, I'm really curious whether the current cast of NetBeans >> mentors are really aware of the IP re

Re: Radical proposal: no initial list of committers

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > The NetBeans proposal (among many others in the past) has demonstrated a > significant "problem" with trying to establish an appropriate list of > initial committers. There are many people that want to be on, for various >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:19 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 2:30 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > >> Just to make sure that my argument is clearly stated let me make two points >> very, very explicitly: >&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Geertjan Wielenga > wrote: >> ...The vote on this proposal is explicitly not tied to contact being >> made to everyone for inclusion

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Geertjan Wielenga wrote: > On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote: > > >> Correct. The whole point of Incubation at Apache is to show that the >> community can learn to self-govern by following Apache processes -

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:30 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > I spoke with Geertjan this afternoon. We both happened to be at the same > popular java conference in San Francisco. I did give him some advice on > the current initial contributors list. Basically two notes: > > -

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Wade Chandler > wrote: >> ...I recently contributed some things for Groovy support, and intend to work >> quite a bit on those features... >

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi Wade, > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Wade Chandler > wrote: >> ..I can say as a long time contributor who is not on the initial list, I >> understand, think it is fine, and

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Geertjan Wielenga <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > >> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a >> criteria >> to be added as a committer after the project enters incuba

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 1:15 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Mark Struberg > wrote: >> ...Please note that during the incubation people need to either show that >> they >> are eager to engage with the

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi! I've recently had an inquiry from a former Sun employee who used to hack on NetBeans way back when: how was the list of initial committers determined? Or more importantly, if he wants to be added to that list up-front would that be OK? Thanks, Roman. On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:40 AM,

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > I tend to agree with Alex' interpretation. Makes two of us. > But we don't yet know what is part of the hg repo and what is part of the > Oracle contribution. > > What would happen if someone e.g. did commit

Re: [VOTE] MADlib v1.9.1-rc2

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:39 PM, Frank McQuillan wrote: > > Hello Incubator PMC, > > The Apache MADlib (incubating) community has voted on and approved the > proposal to release MADlib v1.9.1-rc2. > > The voting result is available at: >

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Hivemall into the Apache Incubator

gards, > Makoto > > 2016-09-13 9:23 GMT+09:00 Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org>: >> On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:47 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: >>> Following the discussion thread, I would like to call a >>> VOTE on accepting Hivem

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Wade Chandler wrote: > Do you mean from the stand point of it being a Java based application, or > that some how > NetBeans and the Java TCK are related? I don’t think either is an impact on > NetBeans IMHO; > not any more than it is

Re: DRAFT report September 2016

When were the last committers or PMC members elected? > > Jim Jagielski was added as a mentor. > > Signed-off-by: > > [ ](fineract) Ross Gardler > [ ](fineract) Greg Stein > [X](fineract) Roman Shaposhnik > [ ](fineract) Jim Jagielski > > Shepherd/Mentor notes:

[RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Hivemall into the Apache Incubator

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:47 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: > Following the discussion thread, I would like to call a > VOTE on accepting Hivemall into the Apache Incubator. > > [] +1 Accept Hivemall into the Apache Incubator > [] +0 Abstain. > [] -

Re: [VOTE] Accept Hivemall into the Apache Incubator

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 10:47 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: > Following the discussion thread, I would like to call a > VOTE on accepting Hivemall into the Apache Incubator. > > [] +1 Accept Hivemall into the Apache Incubator > [] +0 Abstain. > [] -

[VOTE] Accept Hivemall into the Apache Incubator

=== * Roman Shaposhnik (Pivotal, ASF member, IPMC member) Apache Bigtop/Incubator PMC member === Nominated Mentors === * Reynold Xin (Dataricks, ASF member) Apache Spark PMC member * Markus Weimer (Microsoft, ASF member) Apache REEF PMC member * Xiangrui Meng (Databricks, ASF member) Apache Spark

Re: [DISCUSS] Hivemall Incubation Proposal

Hi! It seems that the discussion has converged and I'd like to make one extra call for volunteering mentors. Please let me know ASAP since I'd like to get the VOTE going tomorrow. Thanks, Roman. On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi! >

Re: Namespacing of subproject Docker images vs. Incubator policy

See my reply to John if you're curious to know my take on both questions. Thanks, Roman. On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Mike Jumper <mike.jum...@guac-dev.org> wrote: > On Aug 28, 2016 5:58 PM, "Roman Shaposhnik" <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: >> >> Firs

Re: Namespacing of subproject Docker images vs. Incubator policy

On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 6:28 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:58 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> > wrote: > >> First of all, the way apache org is setup on GitHub make me 99% sure >> that the only artifacts al

Re: Namespacing of subproject Docker images vs. Incubator policy

First of all, the way apache org is setup on GitHub make me 99% sure that the only artifacts allowed there would be release ones. If we agree on that, I see no problem with apache/incubator-foo naming of your *released* Docker images. Note that there was a separate discussion focused on where

Re: Is the incubator full?

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 7:26 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > All, > > I'm wondering if the Apache Incubator is full right now? It seems that this question gets asked about once a year. The consensus always seems to be that this may not be the right question to ask. It is sort

Re: Ease of release process and exit criteria

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > I wonder if the requirement might be better phrased along the lines of > "must have releases completed by a total of > 2 release managers". I really like this criteria and use it extensively with my podlings. Thanks,

Re: [DISCUSS] Hivemall Incubation Proposal

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Makoto Yui wrote: > >> There are 5 individuals, excluding project committers, sent pull requests >> to the project before moving to ALv2: smly, y-tag,

Re: [DISCUSS] Hivemall Incubation Proposal

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Makoto Yui wrote: > Hi Marvin, > > 2016-08-24 1:23 GMT+09:00 Marvin Humphrey : >> Looking at the Github history, though, it seems that there were pull requests >> and issues file by others prior to the Mar 16, 2015

[DISCUSS] Hivemall Incubation Proposal

) * Kai Sasaki (sas...@treasure-data.com) == Affiliations == === Treasure Data === * Makoto Yui * Kai Sasaki === NTT === * Takeshi Yamamuro * Tsuyoshi Ozawa Apache Hadoop PMC member === Hortonworks === * Daniel Dai (ASF member) Apache Pig PMC member == Sponsors == === Champion === * Roman

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode (incubating) 1.0.0-incubating.M3 release

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 6:24 PM, William Markito wrote: > Hello Incubator IPMC, > > This is a call for a vote on the Apache Geode (incubating) release > 1.0.0-incubating.M3. > > This release candidate, 1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC7, has successfully passed a > vote for a release on

Re: Ease of release process and exit criteria

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 2:23 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > Hi, > > I've noticed a pattern in some the board reports of PMCs who are > beginning to experience difficulties. In a notable number of cases a > significant part of the problem is difficulty in producing a release. > The

Re: [VOTE] OpenAZ retirement

On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > Hi ! > > > Despite an effort to reboot the project in april, we weren't successful > in keeping the existing committers active. At this point, a decision to > retire the podling was taken, and a vote was don eon the

Re: Is it ok to put ASF header onto ALv2 compatibly licensed code?

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Mike Jumper <mike.jum...@guac-dev.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Mike Jumper <mike.jum...@guac-dev.org> wrote: >>> On Tue, Aug 9,

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Mike Jumper wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Justin Mclean > wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> Why? It would be perfectly fine for PG project to include, lets say an MIT >>> source code. >> >> That would be

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > To be concrete: up thread was mention of shm.c > > I found two shm.c files in the HAWQ repo. It says it came in as part of > the SGA. I looked in PostGreSQL's repo, but didn't find shm.c in the same > paths. So where did

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> Why? It would be perfectly fine for PG project to include, lets say an MIT >> source code. > > That would be compatible with our license. But what if they included GPL or > CDDL licensed software? There's

Re: Is it ok to put ASF header onto ALv2 compatibly licensed code?

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Mike Jumper <mike.jum...@guac-dev.org> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> ... >> >> === >> Licensed to the Apache S

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> If you're asking why adding ALv2 header is against the letter of the >> policy, the answer is simple. >> Quote: >>"3. Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of >> third-party source

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> Sure, but mu point is: since I'm not comfortable going against the >> current stated policy >> on unmodified 3d party: >>http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party > > Why exactly is that

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> If you remember, we had a very similar conversation in the context of >> Kudu, and I’d like HAWQ to stick to the same path treating unmodified >> upstream code that Kudu >> settled on:

Is it ok to put ASF header onto ALv2 compatibly licensed code?

A very good question/point originated as part of the HAWQ podling release discussion. I'm forking it into a separate thread and CCing legal-discuss to help clarify this (at least for myself) once and for all. On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > AIUI, if it is

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:39 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > On 8/9/16, 1:27 PM, "shaposh...@gmail.com on behalf of Roman Shaposhnik" > <shaposh...@gmail.com on behalf of ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: > >>On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Justi

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >>> if you're saying that we need to slap an ALv2 license header on something >>> like shm.c -- I don't feel comfortable doing that > > Perhaps ask yourself why that is? Is it because the >

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> This is why we're relying a great deal on RAT's exclusion file to mark >> the files that came from PG even though their license headers could look >> weir enough. > > Would’t be better to fix/add the

Re: [VOTE] Apache HAWQ (incubating) 2.0.0.0-incubating Release

Hi Justin! sorry for a belated reply -- I was on a glorious 2.5 vacation with a total disconnect from my email/etc (I have to admit I did Tweet a bit, but only when it came to non-software related things like politics or beer). And speaking of beer -- we really owe you a big one. I hope you're

Re: [VOTE]: Graduate Apache Kudu from the incubator

On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Jake Farrell wrote: > This thread is to start a vote on the graduation resolution Apache Kudu has > approved on the dev list with 12 positive votes (11 PPMC, 1 community (6 > from IPMC members)) > > Status page:

Re: [DISCUSS] Incubator Logo & Branding

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 7:42 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:23 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> > wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 7:06 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> &

Re: [DISCUSS] Incubator Logo & Branding

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > Sounds just right to me. > > I just spend a few minutes going through incubator sites. The number of > sites that had the incubator logo was definitely less in my cursory > examination than the number that made it clear

Re: IPMC release vote checklist

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Is this wha

Re: [DISCUSS] Incubator Logo & Branding

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 7:06 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > All, > > As a follow up to the current discussions happening, I wanted to get > opinions from the IPMC on whether or not the Incubator logo should be > included in podling websites. > > Take

Re: Notes on branding

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Tim Williams wrote: > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:43 PM, John D. Ament wrote: >> Mike, >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:12 PM Mike Jumper wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Gunnar

Re: IPMC release vote checklist

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Joe Witt wrote: > Is this what you're looking for > >http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list That's the MPV check list ;-) but I thought we had a much more expanded one on a wiki some place. It is totally

IPMC release vote checklist

Hi! I remember we used to have a checklist of things published somewhere, but I can't find it anymore? What I'm talking about is something along the lines of: signature and hashes good? DISCLAIMER is good? NOTICE is good? LICENSE is good?

Re: [NOTICE] Community vote to graduate Apache Kudu

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Todd Lipcon wrote: > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:22 AM, John D. Ament > wrote: > >> Is the status page accurate? Only one added committer and no releases while >> under incubation? >> > > Yes, just one added committer so far.

Re: Trafodion podling needs more mentors

Help me understand, why is this a mentor issue and not IPMC one? Thanks, Roman. On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Atanu Mishra <atanu.mis...@esgyn.com> wrote: > Response below. > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> > wrote: > >

Re: Trafodion podling needs more mentors

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 4:05 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > Dave, > > For some reason, I feel like I commented on that thread as well, but don't > see it, so I'm either thinking of something else or its inlined somewhere > that I didn't see (e.g. the emails back and forth with

Re: DISCUSS: Trafodion for TLP

On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Stack wrote: > We'd like to solicit feedback on whether the Trafodiion project is ready to > go TLP. I am the project Champion writing on behalf of the project PMC. > > Our clutch report is nice and healthy [2]. Our up-to-date status page can > be

Re: Looking for mentors

On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 3:46 AM, Julian Hyde wrote: > If each graduating podling provided 2 or 3 mentors (or one person prepared to > mentor 2 or 3 projects) > the problem would be solved. It would be a (virtuous) pyramid scheme and the > incubator could grow

Re: Looking for mentors

On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 3:37 AM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> FWIW: I'm still a big fan of having a cap on the # of podlings a single >> mentor >> could have > > I have a self imposed cap and I’m currently at capacity so sorry can’t help > out. Yup. Make two of us!

Re: Looking for mentors

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote: > (Off-topic) At some point we may need to discuss our incubation capacity... > People present cool proposal and they get vote just because that, without > checking our available resources. FWIW: I'm still a big fan of

Re: MADLib "contributors"

Please stop putting a public mailing list on the same To: line as a private one. This is a pretty dangerous habit. I'll replace private@madlib with dev@madlib. Please reply to that part of the thread. Thanks, Roman. On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >

Re: MADLib "contributors"

Changing private -> dev. Correct. But credit needs to be given where credit is due. I'm actually in the middle of a very similar discussion here at AMPlab with Spark folks. Now that they acknowledged that all ongoing contributions should be credited according to the Apache Way, they are asking a

Re: Number of projects in Incubation [was: [VOTE] Release Apache Mynewt 0.9.0-incubating-rc1]

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Sterling Hughes wrote: >> I just want to clarify here on the thread —- while I think in general there >> may be problems with too many podlings/inactive

Re: Number of projects in Incubation [was: [VOTE] Release Apache Mynewt 0.9.0-incubating-rc1]

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 6:05 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > I can agree that there's an issue with the overall number of podlings > around. However, I don't agree with telling a podling that the IPMC isn't > going to look at your vote and that your mentors should do that.

Re: Number of projects in Incubation [was: [VOTE] Release Apache Mynewt 0.9.0-incubating-rc1]

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > I respectfully disagree... One of the main reasons we went from 1 to 3 > recommended mentors, way back in the days, was that those 3 would be the > primary people to ping for binding votes, without limiting the rest of

Re: [VOTE] Accept Pony Mail into the Apache Incubator

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > Since it seems the discussion has died down, I am now calling a vote on > accepting Pony Mail into the Incubator. Sorry in advance for potato. > > This vote will run for the usual 72 hours. An enthusiastic +1

Re: [VOTE] Accept PredictionIO into the Apache Incubator

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > Since discussion on the matter of PredictionIO has died down, I would like > to call a VOTE > on accepting PredictionIO into the Apache Incubator. > > Proposal: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PredictionIO > > [ ] +1

Re: [DISCUSS] CarbonData incubation proposal

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 10:57 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: >> Hi Luke, >> >> I fully agree with you. The committers are already involved to clean-up the >> repo (PRs have been created). >>

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

son to believe they all have a stake >> at entering incubation. >> >> It's totally fine with me if we stick to that list. I am just trying to >> facilitate the fairest process possible. >> >> >> On Friday, May 20, 2016, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@s

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Suneel Marthi wrote: > I definitely have concerns about too many folks becoming initial committers > and bringing their own corporate agendas to this project. > > I suggest that first we vote PIO into incubator then bring in those less >

Re: Looking for a champion (and maybe a mentor)

Daniel, what are your expectations for the Champion? IPMC has recently discussed doing away with the role altogether since it doesn't seem to add any value on top of active mentors. Whether that happens or not, I'm still surprised you're specifically seeking out a champion. Thanks, Roman. On

Re: Throwing my hat in the ring

Welcome to the club Daniel! And if you're looking for advice on how to help the most: personally I consider reviewing podling releases the most fruitful area. Thanks, Roman. On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 6:18 PM, wrote: > Hi, all; > I've been having a lot of great F2F talks

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

Super excited to see this proposal! This will finally allow us to have an ASF managed backend for next generation data-driven apps that I see emerging quite rapidly. The proposal looks great to me (although I'd recommend calling Scala as an implementation language more prominently since it may

Re: Additional mentor steps?

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 4:38 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 6:29 PM Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> > wrote: > >> On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: >> > My reacti

Re: Additional mentor steps?

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: > My reaction (being ignorant of the machinery behind phonebook and > authorization) > is that adding to asf-authorization-template on podling creation would be ok > (since it > is done only once per podling, by a mentor who

Re: Additional mentor steps?

To answer back into the original thread (based on the question about Phonebook last week): On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 6:51 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > All, > > Due to some changes in recent times around the ASF, I think I've identified > a new setup step for podlings. > > I'd

Re: [VOTE] Accept Fluo into the Apache Incubator

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Billie Rinaldi wrote: > Since discussion has died down, I would like to call a VOTE on accepting > Fluo into the Apache Incubator. > > Proposal: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/FluoProposal > > [ ] +1 Accept Fluo into the Apache Incubator > [

Podlings Shark Tank presentations

Hi! The Podlings Shark Tank presentations are going to happen today at ApacheCON: May 12 • 4:40pm - 5:30pm: https://s.apache.org/acna2016_shark_tank If you're attending ApacheCON -- consider joining us! We've got a great line up of speakers: Mohit Soni (Myriad) Jean-Baptiste Onofré

Re: [FINAL DRAFT] Incubator PMC Board Report - May 2016

fferent companies. We are having more outreach by participating in >> conferences and we are presenting in Apache Con, Strata + Hadoop World. >> >> Date of last release: >> >> 2016-03-28 >> >> When were the last committers or PMC members elected? >

Re: Showcase your project at ApacheCON: consider Podling Shark Tank

.sched.org/event/6M1u/lightning-talks If your polding happens to be in Big Data space and you can present on Tue, please email me ASAP so I can make sure that both days can comfortably fit all the speakers. The format will remain the same! Thanks, Roman. On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Roman

Re: Showcase your project at ApacheCON: consider Podling Shark Tank

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:05 PM, DO YUNG YOON wrote: > Roam, Can you please also add me. DoyungYoon. > I would like to add Apache S2Graph (incubating) to the list. Thanks. Done! Thanks, Roman. - To

Re: Showcase your project at ApacheCON: consider Podling Shark Tank

I'd like to add myself and Mohit to the list to pitch Myriad > > -Adam- > me@ > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <r...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> I apologize for the wide distribution, but since my email to general@ >> did

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Geode (incubating) 1.0.0-incubating.M2

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > Hello Incubator PMC, > > This is a call for a vote on the Apache Geode (incubating) release > 1.0.0-incubating.M2. > > This release candidate, 1.0.0-incubating.M2.RC2, has successfully passed a > vote for a release >

Re: [VOTE] Retire Concerted

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: > Following a discussion[1], the Concerted community has voted to retire the > project from incubation[2]. Per the retirement guide[3], the next step is an > IPMC vote for retirement. > > This is a vote of the IPMC to confirm

Re: [PROPOSAL] Gossip incubator proposal

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 5:55 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > I can't speak with 100% certainty, but it sounds like an SGA would be > expected prior to importing into an ASF repo. That's the usual protocol. Thanks, Roman.

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >