On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
On Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:13:30 AM Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
Hi Daniel...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
We had a very similar discussion about the back word
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
nour.moham...@gmail.com wrote:
On the other hand, I totally respect that Cloudera's interest to support
their customers and provide backword compatibility, but this is
I don't see that this getting to any clear end yet. So I suggest that we
take this from a Sqoop instance to be a discussion on rules them selves.
I would like to start a [VOTE] about whether it is a *must* for podlings to
rename all packages before being a TLP or not over keeping the old package
Hi all.
A few days ago, I wrote the prototype of write-back project.
In short, this project aims to ensure the short response time of
select/update occurred frequently and simultaneously on environment such as
database using write-back mechanism.
Details is explained at
On Feb 29, 2012 4:15 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
On Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:13:30 AM Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
Hi Daniel...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org
On Feb 28, 2012 9:02 AM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
...
That sounds reasonable and hopefully easy to do (if not this case might
even be more worrisome then).
I'm not really sure though if Apache Extras is an appropriate location
either. I think Apache Extras intends to convey an affiliation
Currently, this vote has 2 +1 and some comments. This release vote
isn't going to get the necessary 3 +1's so is being closed. We'll be
back with another RC.
Andy
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Hi Greg...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 4:15 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
On Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:13:30 AM Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
Yes I did, and thanks for clarification :), and please read my as well :).
Thanks.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Has nothing to do with incubation. You're talking about Foundation-wide
policy. You cannot impose different naming rules on podlings, than what
strictly -1 for forcing a name change on graduation.
That would just cause additional overhead without any benefit.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:15 PM
Subject: Re:
-1 here.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:38 AM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
strictly -1 for forcing a name change on graduation.
That would just cause additional overhead without any benefit.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
From: Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com
To:
On Feb 29, 2012 7:32 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din nour.moham...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Greg...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the right thing for our community and product. That is
our
determination, and is our Right.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 4:15 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
On Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:13:30 AM Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
Hi
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
strictly -1 for forcing a name change on graduation.
Maybe we have some confusion here. No one is talking about changing the
name of the podling.
The discussion pertains to the presence of com.cloudera packages in the
Hi Greg...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 7:32 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din nour.moham...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Greg...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Has nothing to do with incubation. You're talking about Foundation-wide
policy. You cannot impose different naming rules on podlings, than what is
imposed on TLPs. Please see my response in the original thread. You need a
On 29/02/12 10:02, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
I don't see that this getting to any clear end yet. So I suggest that we
take this from a Sqoop instance to be a discussion on rules them selves.
I would like to start a [VOTE] about whether it is a *must* for podlings to
rename all packages before
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Has nothing to do with incubation. You're talking about Foundation-wide
policy. You cannot impose different naming rules on podlings, than what
is
On 29/02/12 13:07, Alex Karasulu wrote:
[snip]
There is no legal (trademark or copyright) problem that I'm aware of. There
is no technical problem that I'm aware of.
OK do we have the right to create any kind of package or class under
com.cloudera (or any other companies packages)?
This is
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 4:15 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:06 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
On
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din
nour.moham...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Has nothing to do with incubation. You're talking about
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Has nothing to do with incubation. You're talking about Foundation-wide
policy. You cannot impose different naming rules on podlings, than what is
On Feb 29, 2012 8:07 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the right thing for our community and product. That is
our
determination, and is our Right.
Sorry but I don't think
I'd like the address this and Greg's other email but let's move this over
to the other discussion thread so this one can close and Scoop can continue
forward.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Ian Dickinson i...@epimorphics.com wrote:
On 29/02/12 13:07, Alex Karasulu wrote:
[snip]
There is
On Feb 29, 2012 8:31 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din nour.moham...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Greg...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I gave it more thought and IMO, I think we should raise the issue to
the
Board to get to some results,
Raise what issue? I
On Feb 29, 2012 8:45 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
...
OK do we have the right to create any kind of package or class under
com.cloudera (or any other companies packages)?
I'd like to approach it by answering this question. Because if we look at
it like this then we'll
Hi...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Has nothing to do with incubation. You're talking about
Hi Alex
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 4:15 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org
I don't think it's a good question. I think that it is typical of the
sort of hypothetical question which leads to heaps of scorn from Sam.
I can imagine circumstances where it would make some sense, and some
cases where it would be evidence of a serious problem in a TLP.
The Foundation is
On Feb 29, 2012 8:34 AM, Ian Dickinson i...@epimorphics.com wrote:
On 29/02/12 10:02, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
I don't see that this getting to any clear end yet. So I suggest that we
take this from a Sqoop instance to be a discussion on rules them selves.
I would like to start a [VOTE]
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 8:07 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the right thing for our community and product.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 8:45 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
...
OK do we have the right to create any kind of package or class under
com.cloudera (or any other companies packages)?
I'd like to approach it
Seems we're continuing the discussion in both threads now. More inline ...
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Ian Dickinson i...@epimorphics.com wrote:
On 29/02/12 13:07, Alex Karasulu wrote:
[snip]
There is no legal (trademark or copyright) problem that I'm aware of.
There
is no
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.comwrote:
I don't think it's a good question. I think that it is typical of the
sort of hypothetical question which leads to heaps of scorn from Sam.
Please! Don't invoke Sam :).
Jokes aside take a look the my last two posts
On 02/29/2012 02:45 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 8:07 AM, Alex Karasuluakaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Steingst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the right thing for our community and product. That is
our
determination, and is
Establish whether Apache OpenMeetings is a suitable name
--
Key: PODLINGNAMESEARCH-7
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-7
Project: Podling Suitable Names Search
On 02/29/2012 03:52 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
On 02/29/2012 02:45 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 8:07 AM, Alex Karasuluakaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Steingst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the right thing for our community and
On 29 February 2012 15:39, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
On 02/29/2012 03:52 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
...
I would propose that an ASF project SHOULD not use 3rd party namespaces,
unless there is a very strong and logical requirement to do so.
I'm explicitly not using the term MUST here.
+1
As another point of reference, there is at least one case I'm aware of where
we HAD to put some code developed at Apache into non-org.apache namespace in
order for the code to work. This was taken up on legal discuss and, at the
time, no issues about doing so were raised.
See:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
The discussion pertains to the presence of com.cloudera packages in the
source code of a podling for the sake of backwards compatibility with
Cloudera products.
Alex this is an incorrect summary of the facts, similar
me/tom/chris is not sufficient? Or did I miss something?
Patrick
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Brock Noland br...@cloudera.com wrote:
Great! Now we only need one more +1 from an IPMC member. Added
general to the email chain.
Brock
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Mattmann, Chris A
Check your spam folder? ;-)
http://markmail.org/message/yvmtokdbprn5h2vl
Patrick
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Brock Noland br...@cloudera.com wrote:
I didn't see Tom's vote? Sometimes emails don't show up in my box so
I checked here as well and cannot find it?
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
As another point of reference, there is at least one case I'm aware of
where
we HAD to put some code developed at Apache into non-org.apache namespace
in
order for the code to work. This was taken up on legal discuss
Greg, from a legal standpoint I'm not 100% sattisfied.
Having a com.cloudera package in any Apache project is imo a show stopper. This
should not have been passing the IP clearance at all.
Cloudera is a company, and thus a trademark.
If we write software and use the com.cloudera package
On 02/29/2012 01:33 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
No project should be allowed to graduate without solving all issues
pertaining to marks. It's a failure of the incubator in the past for
allowing other projects to do so. I'm shocked it was allowed.
This is not a trademark issue. Package names are
On 02/29/2012 06:19 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
The class/package names are merely not being deleted. Presuming that the
original code was part of the inceptional code grant, one can conclude that
the company in question doesn't mind their namespace being used by ASF
projects *for that
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org
wrote:
The discussion pertains to the presence of com.cloudera packages in the
source code of a podling for the sake of backwards compatibility with
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
On 02/29/2012 02:45 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012 8:07 AM, Alex Karasuluakaras...@apache.org** wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Greg Steingst...@gmail.com wrote:
...
They remain.
Keeping them is the right
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:11 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On 02/29/2012 01:33 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
No project should be allowed to graduate without solving all issues
pertaining to marks. It's a failure of the incubator in the past for
allowing other projects to do so.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org wrote:
On 02/29/2012 06:19 AM, Alex Karasulu wrote:
The class/package names are merely not being deleted. Presuming that the
original code was part of the inceptional code grant, one can
conclude that
the company in
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 5:23 AM, Alex Karasulu akaras...@apache.org
Sqoop was ASL licensed and had an open following long before it
was accepted
Arvind,
(Sorry, I missed this discussion.)
On Feb 28, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
Please see [1] for details on why the code is like this. The short
summary is that binary compatibility requires us to respect all
extension points within the code.
[1]
On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
Arvind,
(Sorry, I missed this discussion.)
On Feb 28, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
Please see [1] for details on why the code is like this. The short
summary is that binary compatibility requires us to respect all
Hi Arun,
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:11 AM, Arun C Murthy a...@hortonworks.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 11:10 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote:
Arvind,
(Sorry, I missed this discussion.)
On Feb 28, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
Please see [1] for details on why the code is like
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Alan D. Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
+1 - binding
Regards,
Alan
On Feb 26, 2012, at 8:03 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
The graduation guide[1] recommends that the Rat community demonstrates it's
willingness to govern itself
+1
Niall
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
Hi IPMCers and Incubator community,
Apache Rave entered the Incubator almost 1 year ago on March 1st 2011.
Since then Rave provided 7 incubator releases, added 3 more committers/PPMC
members, and shows a steady growth
+1
Niall
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Arvind Prabhakar arv...@apache.org wrote:
This is a call for vote to graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator.
Sqoop entered Incubator in June of 2011. Since then it has added three
new committers from diverse organizations, added two new PPMC
+1
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
Niall
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Arvind Prabhakar arv...@apache.org wrote:
This is a call for vote to graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator.
Sqoop entered Incubator in June of 2011. Since
That is really weird. That is two release votes which haven't shown up
in my inbox or spam folder.
Vote passed! I will work on publishing.
Brock
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:10 PM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote:
Check your spam folder? ;-)
http://markmail.org/message/yvmtokdbprn5h2vl
The vote closed a day or two ago, passing with all +1's. (fyi)
On Feb 29, 2012 2:48 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
Niall
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Arvind Prabhakar
Doug referenced a groklaw article in the other thread. Package names are
not trademarkable.
On Feb 29, 2012 1:04 PM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
Greg, from a legal standpoint I'm not 100% sattisfied.
Having a com.cloudera package in any Apache project is imo a show stopper.
This
Thanks Greg. The vote was closed Feb 27, 2012. The tally of votes was
sent out shortly thereafter and can be found at:
http://markmail.org/message/vnti4j7kailm4hxb
Since consensus on graduation of Sqoop from Apache Incubator has been
reached, I will proceed to the next step of submitting the
+1 (non-binding)
Good luck guys
- Henry
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 4:26 AM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
Hi IPMCers and Incubator community,
Apache Rave entered the Incubator almost 1 year ago on March 1st 2011.
Since then Rave provided 7 incubator releases, added 3 more committers/PPMC
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
Leo, are you out there?
Hmm? Oh, this again...
Having company names or trademarks in java namespaces is a pretty
stupid convention. It gets us mess like this...
There is no policy that incubating java projects must
The vote to release Apache Tashi 201202-incubating received two +1 votes
from IPMC members. Three +1 votes were required, so the vote fails to pass.
The Apache Tashi team will build another release candidate soon, and
will resubmit a vote for release.
Thanks,
Michael.
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Michael Stroucken mxs+apa...@cmu.edu wrote:
The vote to release Apache Tashi 201202-incubating received two +1 votes
from IPMC members. Three +1 votes were required, so the vote fails to pass.
The Apache Tashi team will build another release candidate soon, and
We need IPMCer's votes!
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 29, 2012, at 6:12 PM, Thomas Jungblut thomas.jungb...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Signatures:
- GPG signatures matches (asc)
- md5 sums ok
- sha1 sums ok
Build:
build is fine with maven, testcases pass (tar and zip)
Examples:
Tested all
Luciano Resende wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Michael Stroucken mxs+apa...@cmu.edu wrote:
The vote to release Apache Tashi 201202-incubating received two +1 votes
from IPMC members. Three +1 votes were required, so the vote fails to pass.
The Apache Tashi team will build another
Michael
You can leave the vote open. However, if you are making changes I would
repack and revote.
Usually there is a revote if the changes are anything other than say a
minor mod to a README.
Paul
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Michael Stroucken mxs+apa...@cmu.eduwrote:
Luciano Resende
69 matches
Mail list logo
