+1 to Ted's message. I am not trying to sabotage the proposal, just
trying to point out the potential problems you might run into during
incubation/at graduation.
IIUC, you can release code that is completely vetted, so if parts are
still unvetted, it would not prevent you from releasing the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Santiago Gala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008 2:48 PM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
snip...
1. You have to use subversion.
Why? Has been a vote done? where? I vote +1 for git if a
On that note, since there has been so discussion on this thread, I
think it might be time to open another thread and formally decide
whether to accept the Thrift proposal, which I will go do now.
-Ted.
On Feb 7, 2008 9:14 AM, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 to Ted's message. I am
On 2/8/08, Ted Husted [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On that note, since there has been so discussion on this thread, I
think it might be time to open another thread and formally decide
whether to accept the Thrift proposal, which I will go do now.
That was my aim. I didn't want the proposal
Yes, there is a subtle disjoint or two. :)
Excluding patches that simply modify an existing artifact, we do need
licensing agreements from all individual contributors, regardless of
whether they become ASF committers or members of the podling PMC.
Otherwise, the ASF does not have clear title to
On 2/1/08, Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, dropping parts of the code feels counterproductive to me, as I
think it might put up a perceived barrier to collaboration with the
Thrift project.
As long as you remember that you can't release or graduate without properly
audited code
On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As long as you remember that you can't release or graduate
without properly
audited code with a paper trail to the original author of the code.
You can release from the incubator before all IP is cleared.
No you can't: from the policy
On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release
history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first
release. Anyways, throwing away the code just to *enter* the Incubator
is neither required
True
Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release
history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first
release. Anyways, throwing away the code just to *enter* the Incubator
is neither required nor seems like a good approach.
Andrus
On Feb 4, 2008, at
On Feb 4, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
And to be quite frank, it feels very counterproductive to me to
remove
code from the project with full a priori intention of putting it back
in.
Are you sure you will get the appropriate ICLA's from all the
authors that
have
@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release
history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first
release. Anyways, throwing away the code just
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:48 -0800, Mark Slee wrote:
Well, note that this isn't strictly an IP issue. The issue here was the
committers list, not the IP of the code. I don't see why all the code
would need to be written by people on the initial committers list to
pass IP restrictions.
These
On Feb 2, 2008 2:48 PM, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
Probably not very well :-). Basically, we know how to do the apache-
style open source
David Reiss [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
Leo already gave a decent explanation.
Basically, it comes down to two aspects:
1) infrastructure support
2) cultural bias
There's no No git rule that I know
On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
Probably not very well :-). Basically, we know how to do the apache-
style open source process using centralized version control, we don't
quite know how
On Jan 30, 2008, at 5:55 AM, Upayavira wrote:
As you can see from other proposals, I think you'll find it work
better
with a single committer pool. As others have said, I personally have
never seen a problem with this approach - people steer away from code
that they are unfamiliar with, or
.
Removing people's code from the project could send an insulting and
negative message.
Cheers,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Martijn Dashorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 10:39 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
Perhaps
even be included in
the proposal?
Cheers,
Matthieu
Cheers,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Martijn Dashorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 10:39 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
Perhaps in the interest of code
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git? We have at least seven
contributors (three at Facebook, four external) using git-svn right now, and I
know that at least a few of us would really like to use native Git as the main
repository for Thrift.
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 16:20 -0800, David Reiss wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git? We have at least seven
contributors (three at Facebook, four external) using git-svn right now, and
I
know that at least a few of us would
On Feb 1, 2008 4:48 PM, Upayavira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 16:20 -0800, David Reiss wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git? We have at least seven
contributors (three at Facebook, four external) using
Thanks for the explanations. Maybe it is too early for me to start
evangelizing, but let me know if either of these factors makes a difference.
1/ I don't think we would be putting any load on the Apache infrastructure
team. As Matthieu said, it would take about five minutes for one of us to
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 17:21 -0800, David Reiss wrote:
Thanks for the explanations. Maybe it is too early for me to start
evangelizing, but let me know if either of these factors makes a difference.
1/ I don't think we would be putting any load on the Apache infrastructure
team. As
Niclas is correct - this can create hardships, resentments, control
issues in your community. If it's a simple as we don't trust you
Java folks on day one to properly indent Python code I can sympathize
with that concept.
That's about the extent of what we were thinking, but there has been so
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote:
What we'd really
like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons;
1. Creating boundaries within a project, yet
Niclas Hedhman schrieb:
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote:
What we'd really
like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons;
1. Creating
Niclas
I also had exactly the same thoughts on reading the email. I think
learning that committership is a position of trust is a key part of
the incubation process.
So I'm +1 on the proposal, but I would definitely be -1 on graduation
if such a scheme were to be implemented during incubation.
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 23:24 -0800, Mark Slee wrote:
Hi Martin,
*If I look at the initial committers list, I see a big portion to be
facebook developers. During incubation you should work on diversifying.*
*Again, it seems like a huge contingent of facebook developers. You
really should
On 30.01.2008, at 10:35, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote:
What we'd really
like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons;
1.
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 19:30, Erik Abele wrote:
In the end they are here to learn The A Way and if it turns out to be
a problem then they won't be able to graduate so I think it's
premature to turn down the proposal just because of this.
Correct, but putting it in place increases the
Dashorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:34 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
On 1/24/08, Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
=== Core Developers ===
Thrift currently has developers across many
On Jan 30, 2008 2:24 AM, Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What we'd really
like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
I'm not a huge fan of this, but I love the rest of the proposal, so +1
to it! I'm also
Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anyone have feedback? If no objections are voiced, when would it be
appropriate for us to move forward with a VOTE thread on this?
Sorry for not responding. I flagged the email when I first saw it but
didn't have time to respond.
Overall the proposal is
On Jan 30, 2008, at 4:45 PM, J Aaron Farr wrote:
Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Anyone have feedback? If no objections are voiced, when would it be
appropriate for us to move forward with a VOTE thread on this?
Sorry for not responding. I flagged the email when I first saw it but
didn't
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Upayavira wrote:
As you can see from other proposals, I think you'll find it work better
with a single committer pool. As others have said, I personally have
never seen a problem with this approach - people steer away from code
that they are unfamiliar with, or tend to ask
Yoav Shapira wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 2:24 AM, Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What we'd really
like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
I'm not a huge fan of this, but I love the rest of the proposal, so +1
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 11:50 -0500, Ben Maurer wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Upayavira wrote:
As you can see from other proposals, I think you'll find it work better
with a single committer pool. As others have said, I personally have
never seen a problem with this approach - people steer
If there are people who have already proven their *merit* on the
project that are not included on the initial list of committers then I
think they should be.
In reality, many parts of the Thrift code base are already entirely
owned by non-Facebook entities. The Cocoa, C#, Perl, and
Perhaps in the interest of code audit (which needs to be done) and community
building, the code parts of the missing committers should be removed from
the code drop prior to incubation start, and be re-introduced inside the
incubating podling by providing patches through bugzilla?
Martijn
On
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
Hi all,
We've just posted the Apache Incubator proposal for Thrift onto the
Wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ThriftProposal
For those who prefer reading Wiki markup directly, it is copied below.
Cheers,
Mark
= Thrift
On 1/24/08, Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
=== Core Developers ===
Thrift currently has developers across many organizations (e.g.
Facebook, Powerset, ReCaptcha, AmieStreet), many of whom are
contributors to other open source projects.
If I look at the initial committers list, I see a
-Original Message-
From: Mark Slee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 6:07 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
Hi all,
We've just posted the Apache Incubator proposal for Thrift onto the
Wiki:
http
, 2008 1:34 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
On 1/24/08, Mark Slee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
=== Core Developers ===
Thrift currently has developers across many organizations (e.g.
Facebook, Powerset, ReCaptcha, AmieStreet), many of whom
for us to move forward with a VOTE thread on this?
Cheers,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Mark Slee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 6:07 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
Hi all,
We've just posted the Apache
44 matches
Mail list logo
