[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Gossip version gossip-0.1.1-incubating (RC2)

The vote passes: The results of the VOTE was: +1 : 5 0: 0 -1:0 +1 (binding) Justin Mclean Drew Farris John D. Ament P. Taylor Goetz Josh Elser Vote Thread: http://apache-incubator-general.996316.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Gossip-version-gossip-0-1-1-incubating-RC2-td53327.html Thank you

Re: Binary file inclusion (was [VOTE] Apache Toree (incubating) 0.1.0-rc4 as 0.1.0)

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Paul King wrote: > ...I actually think what we ended up with does make it clearer > exactly what is going on Definitely - what Groovy did avoids having Mysterious Binaries in their releases, which we don't want. -Bertrand

[RESULT][VOTE] Release of Apache Mnemonic-0.4.0-incubating [rc1]

*Hi all,* After being opened for over more than 72 hours, the vote for releasing Apache Mnemonic 0.4.0-incubating passed with 3 binding +1s, 1 non-binding +1s and no 0 or -1. **Binding votes +1s:** Patrick Hunt (phunt) Henry Saputra (hsaputra) Gangumalla, Uma (umamahesh) **non-binding votes

Re: Binary file inclusion (was [VOTE] Apache Toree (incubating) 0.1.0-rc4 as 0.1.0)

Yeah, Paul makes a very good point. When you're new to a platform and trying to debug tests, trying to find out whats hidden inside mysterious test jars etc is often tedious at best. Build at test time is ideal. Tom On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <

Re: [RESULT] MXNet to enter the Incubator

Great news. I see your commit for the mailing lists. Before infra can process them, you'll need to create a JIRA for the DNS entries (or they may end up just creating the DNS when they create the mailing lists... depends on the infra admin). Here's an example JIRA from Ratis recently to do

[VOTE] Apache CarbonData 1.0.0-incubating release (RC2)

Hi Incubator PMC, Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache CarbonData(incubating) version 1.0.0. PPMC has passed the vote, here's the PPMC vote thread for 1.0.0 release:

Re: Binary file inclusion (was [VOTE] Apache Toree (incubating) 0.1.0-rc4 as 0.1.0)

The single case that I can see for mystery jars in binary form is when a test case needs to cover malformed binaries or binaries produced on obsolete platforms (does anybody have a Java 1.3 compiler handy). (don't answer that, I wouldn't be surprised if a fair number of people still require 1.3

[DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

All, The Incubator PMC has received feedback from the board that changes may need to be made to the structure of our report. Specifically, there is confusion from the board members over how podlings get classified. There is also a request to increase and improve mentor feedback on podling

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

There were a number of people who opposed the use of the maturity model on this list in 2016. For instance, Greg Stein said: "There has been past controversy on including that as a graduation step. I'm not clear that was a proper addition." and "The Board has never required the IPMC to use the

Mentor docs: Incubator Access Authorization

This looks out of date: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#who-auth-karma It says: Incubator Access Authorization Special karma is required to authorize incubator access for committers. This karma is limited to: - PMC Chairs (past and present) - Selected people in the

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

Ah, sorry for the paragraphs, then. On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 5:52 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > Jim, > > Don't read too deeply into my use of "Podling Maturity Assessment." The > sections of the current summary are simply "Ready to Graduate", "Some > Community Growth", "No

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

I'm fine with 1 and 3, but 2 gives me pause. I like the idea of the maturity model, but is it yet another burden on mentors? If we are trying to increase mentor engagement, we probably don't want to set too high a bar. -Taylor > On Jan 24, 2017, at 8:15 PM, John D. Ament

Re: Mentor docs: Incubator Access Authorization

Answering myself, it went to git. https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=infrastructure-puppet.git;a=blob;f=modules/subversion_server/files/authorization/asf-authorization-template Hen On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > This looks out of date: > >

Re: Binary file inclusion (was [VOTE] Apache Toree (incubating) 0.1.0-rc4 as 0.1.0)

I think my argument is need vs require. Basically with this policy, we would be telling people there are certain tools you may not use. John On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 5:04 PM Ted Dunning wrote: > The single case that I can see for mystery jars in binary form is when a >

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Mnemonic-0.4.0-incubating [rc1]

Hi, Vote results been called, but I did check. All good but don’t forget to update the year in your NOTICE file. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

John, What did you have in mind for “podling maturity assessment”? If it is simply one of the existing phases - “still getting started”, “no release”, “community growth”, “ready to graduate” - I can’t see that being contentious. Julian > On Jan 24, 2017, at 5:39 PM, Jim Apple

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:54 PM Julian Hyde wrote: > John, > > What did you have in mind for “podling maturity assessment”? If it is > simply one of the existing phases - “still getting started”, “no release”, > “community growth”, “ready to graduate” - I can’t see that being >

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

Jim, Don't read too deeply into my use of "Podling Maturity Assessment." The sections of the current summary are simply "Ready to Graduate", "Some Community Growth", "No Release" and "Still Getting Started." I'm simply asking the podling to decide which of those 4 best describe themselves.

Re: [VOTE] Apache CarbonData 1.0.0-incubating release (RC2)

+1 (binding) Casting my vote here. Regards JB⁣​ On Jan 24, 2017, 13:59, at 13:59, Jacky Li <13561...@qq.com> wrote: >Hi Incubator PMC, > >Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache >CarbonData(incubating) version 1.0.0. > >PPMC has passed the vote, here's the PPMC vote thread