Re: [VOTE] Release SAMOA 0.4.0 (incubating) RC1

[Alan Gates]

+1.  Checked the LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER files.  Checked the 
signatures.  Did a build with a clean maven repo.  Checked for binary files.  
Ran a rat check.

As a note there are several files that rat complains about.  Based on a quick 
look I’m not sure it’s possible to add license headers to these files.  If it 
isn’t it would be nice to put these in the exception list so that rat succeeds.

Alan.

> On Sep 19, 2016, at 06:50, Nicolas Kourtellis  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Our new release has been voted from the Apache SAMOA team and we are
> opening the vote to the incubator email list for testing.
> 
> Please vote on releasing the following release candidate as Apache
> SAMOA (incubating)
> version 0.4.0. This release will be the second release for SAMOA in the
> incubator.
> 
> -
> The commit to be voted on is in the branch "releases/0.4.0-incubating"
> (commit fc39238dd7d3674c069a8142312da8c1812bc907):
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-samoa/
> repo?p=incubator-samoa.git;a=commit;h=fc39238dd7d3674c069a8142312da8
> c1812bc907
> 
> Tag v0.4.0-incubating:
> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-samoa/
> repo?p=incubator-samoa.git;a=tag;h=aa5bd941ccbed1aabb46b8119049ac1bb293c3a2
> 
> Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> *https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/nkourtellis.asc
> *
> 
> The staging repository for this release can be found at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/staging/
> org/apache/samoa/samoa/0.4.0-incubating/
> 
> The developer's version artifacts:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/samoa/0.4.0-incubating-rc1/
> 
> -
> 
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache SAMOA 0.4.0 (incubating).
> 
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of at least
> three +1 PPMC votes are cast.
> 
> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache SAMOA 0.4.0 (incubating)
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
> 
> I'm +1 on the release.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Nicolas
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Nicolas Kourtellis


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

RE: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 13:05
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal
> 
> There is a big difference between Apache OpenOffice and NetBeans.
> NetBeans, even with the NetBeans Platform, is a developer-facing
> project.  I presume that the cycle of learning and improvement out
> through the adopters and community for NetBeans is operating
> successfully and will thrive at Apache.  The "eating-your-own-dogfood"
> principle seems to be well in hand [;<).
> 
> There does need to be attention to infrastructure requirements.
> 
> The initial committer list for Apache OpenOffice to enter incubation was
> entirely and publicly self-selected.  That means it includes, to this
> day, individuals who do not commit to the code but contribute, when
> still active, in other ways.  There are acute divisions between those
> who cannot and will not build the code, those who manage to build and
> run the code, and those who can do anything significant with the code
> and test their results.  That division is a tremendous challenge in the
> sustainability of Apache OpenOffice.
[orcmid] 

I should be clear that the acute division is with respect to capacity and 
capabilities and also will.  I did not mean divison as some sort of dispute.

> 
> Although the size of OpenOffice is daunting, that in itself is not a
> challenge to the ASF infrastructure.  The files in the Apache OpenOffice
> 4.1.2 source release consist of
> 
>1.43 GB (1,541,226,333 bytes) of text in
>  60,955 files, in
>   6,429 folders.
> 
>  - Dennis
> 
[ ... ]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

RE: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

There is a big difference between Apache OpenOffice and NetBeans.  NetBeans, 
even with the NetBeans Platform, is a developer-facing project.  I presume that 
the cycle of learning and improvement out through the adopters and community 
for NetBeans is operating successfully and will thrive at Apache.  The 
"eating-your-own-dogfood" principle seems to be well in hand [;<).

There does need to be attention to infrastructure requirements.  

The initial committer list for Apache OpenOffice to enter incubation was 
entirely and publicly self-selected.  That means it includes, to this day, 
individuals who do not commit to the code but contribute, when still active, in 
other ways.  There are acute divisions between those who cannot and will not 
build the code, those who manage to build and run the code, and those who can 
do anything significant with the code and test their results.  That division is 
a tremendous challenge in the sustainability of Apache OpenOffice.

Although the size of OpenOffice is daunting, that in itself is not a challenge 
to the ASF infrastructure.  The files in the Apache OpenOffice 4.1.2 source 
release consist of

   1.43 GB (1,541,226,333 bytes) of text in
 60,955 files, in
  6,429 folders.

 - Dennis   

> -Original Message-
> From: Raphael Bircher [mailto:rbircherapa...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 04:10
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal
> 
> Hi Geertjan
> 
> I'm registred at NetBeams now, to get a closer look at the project. I
> was a bit shocked about the similarities with the formar
> OpenOffice.org project. The structure of the Project, the workflow
> etc. are so close to the OpenOffice.org project, much closer as I
> expected. My biggest fear for the incubation is not the technical
> aspect. For infrastructure we will find solutions, and for many
> problems exist already blueprints from the OpenOffice Project. My
> biggest fear ist the community. As I saw on the NetBeans ML, the
> decision to join the ASF was made by Oracle. Well a load of the
> community members welcome this step, but there are also fears. This
> fears has to be addressed, this is very very important.
> 
> One Mail also complained about the Initial Committer list. Are all
> active committers who did commit in the last 6 month (or so) on the
> initial committer list. forgotten people can create bad blood and
> disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project.
> 
> This are at the moment my biggest concerns.
> 
> Regards Raphael
> 
[ ... ]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

(sorry sent the previous msg too early)

> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
>> On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg"  wrote:
>>>...We don't like to loose any IP provenance... Etc, etc.

>> Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?...

I agree that from the ASF side we don't care about the detailed
provenance of the NetBeans code, if Oracle states that they have the
right to donate it and sign the grant [1]. AFAIK Geertjan and team
have sorted that out already.

It's nice of course to be able to keep history when importing code
into our Git repositories, but the success of that has nothing to do
with our decision to accept the podling or not, which is the topic of
this thread. Worst case, a podling that starts with a tarball of the
current code and no history would be viable.

So thanks Mark for trying that (and being patient with that import ;-)
but let's not sidetrack the discussion too much with those things.

Once again the only thing that we're waiting on before voting on
accepting NetBeans is the infrastructure analysis that Daniel Gruno is
currently performing. Once we have his report here we can move forward
or discuss any remaining issues.

-Bertrand

[1] https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
> On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg"  wrote:
>>...We don't like to loose any IPprovenance... Etc, etc.
>
> Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?  It was for Adobe Flex.  Only a
> couple of committers came in with the 10 year old code base.  Everyone
> else had moved on, but because all were employees of Adobe, it didn't
> matter.  The log just says that someone from Adobe made a commit, not who.
>
> -Alex
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Mark Struberg]

btw, current import status: 230.000 / 303.000


Might probably be finished till tomorrow morning (CEST).

LieGrue,
strub




> On Monday, 19 September 2016, 19:39, Emmanuel Lécharny  
> wrote:
> > Le 19/09/16 à 16:33, Mark Struberg a écrit :
>>  Linux never was on hg, so the comparison doesn't fit.
>> 
>>  To be more clear: I'm not concerned that GIT cannot handle the NetBeans 
> repo size. 
>>  But we cannot guarantee yet that the import from hg to GIT doesn't 
> loose important information or works at all.
> 
> Ok, makes sense then.
> 
> It could not harm anyway. It's just that I don't think it's really
> critical at this point.
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Emmanuel Lécharny]

Le 19/09/16 à 16:33, Mark Struberg a écrit :
> Linux never was on hg, so the comparison doesn't fit.
>
> To be more clear: I'm not concerned that GIT cannot handle the NetBeans repo 
> size. 
> But we cannot guarantee yet that the import from hg to GIT doesn't loose 
> important information or works at all.

Ok, makes sense then.

It could not harm anyway. It's just that I don't think it's really
critical at this point.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[RESULT][VOTE] MADlib v1.9.1-rc2

[Frank McQuillan]

(re-sending with corrected subject line)

The vote has PASSED with 3 +1 binding votes from the Incubator PMC members,
and no 0 or -1 votes:

+1 Justin Mclean
+1 Roman Shaposhnik
+1 John Ament

On behalf of the MADlib community, thank you very much to the reviewers
above and others who commented on the associated legal-discuss thread.

We will proceed with promoting this release candidate.

Regards,
Frank McQuillan

[RESULT][VOTE] MADlib v1.9.1-rc2

[Frank McQuillan]

The vote has PASSED with 3 +1 binding votes from the Incubator PMC members,
and no 0 or -1 votes:

+1 Justin Mclean
+1 Roman Shaposhnik
+1 John Ament

On behalf of the MADlib community, thank you very much to the reviewers
above and others who commented on the associated legal-discuss thread.

We will proceed with promoting this release candidate.

Regards,
Frank McQuillan

Re: [VOTE] MADlib v1.9.1-rc2

[Frank McQuillan]

On behalf of the MADlib community, thank you very much to the reviewers and
others who commented on the associated legal-discuss thread.


On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 6:17 PM, John D. Ament 
wrote:

> +1 binding
>
> While the release contents look odd, they're not wrong.  We'll need to sort
> out the rest via legal prior to graduation.
>
> I would appreciate if the podling did start tracking a project specific
> goal of resolving the BSD licensing switch over to Apache License.
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:40 AM 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:
> >
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-madlib-
> dev/201609.mbox/%3CCAKBQfzT0pw1%3DP-KWuZVsAwORdHdz792WvUtR-DbM%
> 2BH8EkiZdSA%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > This is the 3rd release for Apache MADlib (incubating).
> >
> > The main goals of this release are:
> > * new modules (1-class SVM for novelty detection, prediction metrics,
> > sessionization, pivoting)
> > * improvements to existing modules (class weights in SVM, overlapping
> > patterns in path)
> > * performance improvements (path)
> > * platform updates (PostgreSQL 9.5 and 9.6)
> > * bug fixes
> > * doc improvements
> >
> > For more information including release notes, please see:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MADLIB/MADlib+1.9.1
> >
> > To run check RAT, please do:
> >
> > $mvn verify
> >
> > first to get the correct RAT output.  Look inside of pom.xml to see the
> > classes of exceptions we're managing there for RAT.
> >
> > We're voting on the source (tag):
> > rc/1.9.1-rc2
> >
> > Source Files:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/madlib/1.9.
> 1-incubating-rc2
> >
> > Commit to be voted upon:
> >
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-madlib.
> git;a=commit;h=e1c99c1538dc124c9b323ba76382ba2af05c6892
> >
> > KEYS file containing PGP Keys we use to sign the release:
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/madlib/KEYS
> >
> > Please vote:
> >
> > [ ] +1  approve
> > [ ] +0  no opinion
> > [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
> >
> > *** The vote will be open until Friday Sept 9 at 6 pm Pacific time. ***
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Alex Harui]

On 9/19/16, 8:55 AM, "shaposh...@gmail.com on behalf of Roman Shaposhnik"
 wrote:

>On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Mark Struberg
> wrote:
>>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 some GPL licensed jar to
>>the repo a few years ago?
>> It's easy to catch such things if they are still in the latest version.
>> But what if they got added and later removed? Do we need to filter them
>>out?
>
>No we don't. What ASF stands behind is a release (which is a source
>tarball and optional
>binary convenience artifacts) that we distribute via our own
>infrastructure. While we try
>to keep our repos clean, we are not forced to have them at the same
>level of IP hygene
>that we need for our official releases.
>
>Case in point: Apache Geode (incubating). We entered incubation (and
>ingested the source)
>with a known LGPL dependency embedded in our tree. Getting rid of if
>via refactoring was
>a pre-requisite for our first release, but you can still find history
>in our Git repo of it being
>there before the first release was done.

I agree that the repos don't have to be as clean.  IMO, Oracle has an
incentive to submit a tar ball or import data that is ASF-ready.  This
doesn't mean they have to clean up a GPL add-and-remove, but Oracle might
want to consider scrubbing the donation for that and other things.  At
Adobe, our QA team often used test images that weren't ok to donate such
as pictures of famous people.  The test media never got released so it
didn't matter until donation time.  I think we attempted to scrub out some
traces of how security issues were handled as well.  They could choose to
scrub-and-replace author names for commits as well.

Adobe Flex came in via Subversion before going to Git, so I don't know how
Git import works, but blame works just fine, it just blames "Adobe Import"
instead of some Adobe employee and I think does include the commit
message.  Yes, sometimes knowing who did it helps you understand why, but
most of the time it doesn't matter.

-Alex

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:04, Alex Harui  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg"  wrote:
> 
> 
>> We also need to check whether the author and contributor flags are
>> properly moved over by the import. We don't like to loose any IP
>> provenance... Etc, etc.
> 
> Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?  It was for Adobe Flex.  Only a
> couple of committers came in with the 10 year old code base.  Everyone
> else had moved on, but because all were employees of Adobe, it didn't
> matter.  The log just says that someone from Adobe made a commit, not who.
> 

NB has a contributor agreement too, and so to contribute we all had to sign one 
assigning IP to Oracle (same for Sun when they were around).

https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/patches.html 


“If this is your first code submission to netbeans.org, you must fill in a 
Contributor Agreement - see the CA Policy 
 page for more info.”

https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/hg.html 


“You must have filled in a Contributor Agreement - see the CA Policy 
 page for more info. No 
code can be committed until a CA is completed.”

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf 


Thanks,

Wade


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com

Re: Request to be added to ContributorsGroup on MoinMoin wiki

[Bruce Snyder]

Hi John,

My username for MoinMoin is BruceSnyder.

Bruce

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 7:32 AM, John D. Ament 
wrote:

> Bruce,
>
> Whats your username?  Each wiki requires separate accounts.
>
> John
>
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:30 AM Bruce Snyder 
> wrote:
>
> > Please consider this a request to be added to the ContributorsGroup on
> the
> > MoinMoin wiki at wiki.apache.org. I need to edit the RocketMQ proposal
> and
> > currently I have no edit capability.
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> > --
> > perl -e 'print
> > unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E >
> > ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
> > Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ 
> > Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
> >
>



-- 
perl -e 'print
unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Roman Shaposhnik]

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 some GPL licensed jar to the 
> repo a few years ago?
> It's easy to catch such things if they are still in the latest version.
> But what if they got added and later removed? Do we need to filter them out?

No we don't. What ASF stands behind is a release (which is a source
tarball and optional
binary convenience artifacts) that we distribute via our own
infrastructure. While we try
to keep our repos clean, we are not forced to have them at the same
level of IP hygene
that we need for our official releases.

Case in point: Apache Geode (incubating). We entered incubation (and
ingested the source)
with a known LGPL dependency embedded in our tree. Getting rid of if
via refactoring was
a pre-requisite for our first release, but you can still find history
in our Git repo of it being
there before the first release was done.

Thanks,
Roman.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Mark Struberg]

I tend to agree with Alex' interpretation.

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 some GPL licensed jar to the repo 
a few years ago?
It's easy to catch such things if they are still in the latest version.
But what if they got added and later removed? Do we need to filter them out?

The other reason I would love to keep the history is for research reasons.
Being able to git-blame a file and see the commit comments for a specific line 
often really helps to understand the code. Not always, but often it does.




LieGrue,
strub


PS: I'm in favour of filtering out ANY binaries from source repos. Just blows 
up the disk and download space. But that will be a community discussion within 
the newly formed ASF NetBeans project. Just trying to get an overview.

Will give feedback once I'm back at home and the repo is finished with 
importing.



> On Monday, 19 September 2016, 17:31, Alex Harui  wrote:
> > 
> 
> On 9/19/16, 8:13 AM, "Wade Chandler"  of
> cons...@wadechandler.com> wrote:
> 
>>>  On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:04, Alex Harui >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg" 
> >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
  We also need to check whether the author and contributor flags are
  properly moved over by the import. We don't like to loose any 
> IP
  provenance... Etc, etc.
>>> 
>>>  Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?  It was for Adobe Flex.  Only 
> a
>>>  couple of committers came in with the 10 year old code base.  Everyone
>>>  else had moved on, but because all were employees of Adobe, it 
> didn't
>>>  matter.  The log just says that someone from Adobe made a commit, not
>>> who.
>>> 
>> 
>> Sorry…sent first from wrong email alias...
>> 
>> NB has a contributor agreement too, and so to contribute we all had to
>> sign one assigning IP to Oracle (same for Sun when they were around).
> 
> I assume Oracle legal has confirmed that the CA allows for donation
> without signature?  That was the case for Adobe's CA, but wasn't the 
> case
> for some code Adobe picked up via an acquisition and we had to execute
> more paperwork.  Assuming the CA allows donation, I would think the
> signing of the SGA resets provenance.  Oracle is saying they own every
> line and authorize its donation.  At that point, exactly which human
> actually wrote the code becomes moot from a provenance standpoint, AIUI.
> "Mr. Oracle" contributed every line.
> 
> Of course, I could be wrong...
> 
> -Alex
> 
> B‹CB•È[œÝXœØÜšX™KK[XZ[ˆÙ[™\˜[][œÝXœØÜšX™P[˜ÝX˜]Ü‹˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃB‘›ÜˆY][Û˜[ÛÛ[X[™ËK[XZ[ˆÙ[™\˜[Z[[˜ÝX˜]Ü‹˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃB
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Alex Harui]

On 9/19/16, 8:13 AM, "Wade Chandler"  wrote:

>> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:04, Alex Harui >> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg" >> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> We also need to check whether the author and contributor flags are
>>> properly moved over by the import. We don't like to loose any IP
>>> provenance... Etc, etc.
>> 
>> Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?  It was for Adobe Flex.  Only a
>> couple of committers came in with the 10 year old code base.  Everyone
>> else had moved on, but because all were employees of Adobe, it didn't
>> matter.  The log just says that someone from Adobe made a commit, not
>>who.
>> 
>
>Sorry…sent first from wrong email alias...
>
>NB has a contributor agreement too, and so to contribute we all had to
>sign one assigning IP to Oracle (same for Sun when they were around).

I assume Oracle legal has confirmed that the CA allows for donation
without signature?  That was the case for Adobe's CA, but wasn't the case
for some code Adobe picked up via an acquisition and we had to execute
more paperwork.  Assuming the CA allows donation, I would think the
signing of the SGA resets provenance.  Oracle is saying they own every
line and authorize its donation.  At that point, exactly which human
actually wrote the code becomes moot from a provenance standpoint, AIUI.
"Mr. Oracle" contributed every line.

Of course, I could be wrong...
-Alex

Re: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic

[Ate Douma]

On 2016-09-19 17:09, Suneel Marthi wrote:

I am sorry to be reading this, but I was at Steve Blackmon's talk last week
in Berlin at Flink forward about using Streams +  Flink.

It was a very interesting talk and I chatted with Steve briefly about the
Streams project.


Good to hear that!
I wasn't aware Steve was presenting about Streams in Berlin.



Is there absolutely no chance of reviving this project or giving the
project some more time before calling the attic ?


Sure there is a chance, but for that the project needs active community 
involvement. Which has been lacking for quite a while now.

Community building and involvement really is the primary problem for the
project with only a single active member, which is not sustainable.
However, if you are willing and able to get actively involved, and rally some 
additional community involvement as well, then I'd be happy to postpone/cancel

the retirement VOTE for now.

I suggest to head over to d...@streams.incubator.apache.org, let us know
what you can and will do for the project, and see how that works out.

Regards, Ate






On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Ate Douma  wrote:


On 2016-09-19 16:33, Ate Douma wrote:


On 2016-09-19 15:44, John D. Ament wrote:


Ate,

Please also note the instructions from the incubator's retirement guide.

http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html



Right.
Thanks for pointing this out John.

I've never before had to handle a podling retirement and overlooked this
requires different handling from a TLP retirement.
And with slightly different consequences, e.g. website will be taken down,
instead of flagged as being retired.

So, to do this proper, I'll first cancel the vote thread on dev@streams
and open a new [FINAL][DISCUSS] thread for retirement again, this
time also pointing to the podling retirement page.
This way at least everyone on that list will have a proper notice what
the retirement entails.
(not that I expect a different outcome, but there is no rush either)



Reading the podling retirement guide a bit more thoroughly, I think I it is
sufficient to restart the [VOTE] thread for retirement on dev@streams
with the
link to the podling retirement guide.




And after that I'll open the final [VOTE] for retirement here on general@

Ate



John

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM Ate Douma  wrote:

FYI, I've started below vote to retire Apache Streams, after I first

initiated a
[discuss] thread more than a week ago, which resulted in zero feedback.

Ate
(Streams mentor)

 Forwarded Message 
Subject: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 23:27:11 +0200
From: Ate Douma 
To: d...@streams.incubator.apache.org 

As a final follow up on the earlier [discuss] thread, lets formally
vote on
retiring Apache Streams and move it to the attic.

The process is described at http://attic.apache.org/process.html

[ ] +1 Move Streams to the Attic
[ ] ±0 Proceed according to the majority
[ ] -1 Do not move Streams to the Attic, because... [please add
justification]

Ate



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org











-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org








-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic

[Suneel Marthi]

I am sorry to be reading this, but I was at Steve Blackmon's talk last week
in Berlin at Flink forward about using Streams +  Flink.

It was a very interesting talk and I chatted with Steve briefly about the
Streams project.

Is there absolutely no chance of reviving this project or giving the
project some more time before calling the attic ?




On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 4:58 PM, Ate Douma  wrote:

> On 2016-09-19 16:33, Ate Douma wrote:
>
>> On 2016-09-19 15:44, John D. Ament wrote:
>>
>>> Ate,
>>>
>>> Please also note the instructions from the incubator's retirement guide.
>>>
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html
>>>
>>
>> Right.
>> Thanks for pointing this out John.
>>
>> I've never before had to handle a podling retirement and overlooked this
>> requires different handling from a TLP retirement.
>> And with slightly different consequences, e.g. website will be taken down,
>> instead of flagged as being retired.
>>
>> So, to do this proper, I'll first cancel the vote thread on dev@streams
>> and open a new [FINAL][DISCUSS] thread for retirement again, this
>> time also pointing to the podling retirement page.
>> This way at least everyone on that list will have a proper notice what
>> the retirement entails.
>> (not that I expect a different outcome, but there is no rush either)
>>
>
> Reading the podling retirement guide a bit more thoroughly, I think I it is
> sufficient to restart the [VOTE] thread for retirement on dev@streams
> with the
> link to the podling retirement guide.
>
>
>
>> And after that I'll open the final [VOTE] for retirement here on general@
>>
>> Ate
>>
>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM Ate Douma  wrote:
>>>
>>> FYI, I've started below vote to retire Apache Streams, after I first
 initiated a
 [discuss] thread more than a week ago, which resulted in zero feedback.

 Ate
 (Streams mentor)

  Forwarded Message 
 Subject: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic
 Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 23:27:11 +0200
 From: Ate Douma 
 To: d...@streams.incubator.apache.org 

 As a final follow up on the earlier [discuss] thread, lets formally
 vote on
 retiring Apache Streams and move it to the attic.

 The process is described at http://attic.apache.org/process.html

 [ ] +1 Move Streams to the Attic
 [ ] ±0 Proceed according to the majority
 [ ] -1 Do not move Streams to the Attic, because... [please add
 justification]

 Ate



 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Wade Chandler]

> On Sep 19, 2016, at 11:04, Alex Harui  > wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg"  > wrote:
> 
> 
>> We also need to check whether the author and contributor flags are
>> properly moved over by the import. We don't like to loose any IP
>> provenance... Etc, etc.
> 
> Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?  It was for Adobe Flex.  Only a
> couple of committers came in with the 10 year old code base.  Everyone
> else had moved on, but because all were employees of Adobe, it didn't
> matter.  The log just says that someone from Adobe made a commit, not who.
> 

Sorry…sent first from wrong email alias...

NB has a contributor agreement too, and so to contribute we all had to sign one 
assigning IP to Oracle (same for Sun when they were around).

https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/patches.html 


“If this is your first code submission to netbeans.org , 
you must fill in a Contributor Agreement - see the CA Policy 
 page for more info.”

https://netbeans.org/community/contribute/hg.html 


“You must have filled in a Contributor Agreement - see the CA Policy 
 page for more info. No 
code can be committed until a CA is completed.”

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf 


Thanks,

Wade


===

Wade Chandler
e: cons...@wadechandler.com 

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Alex Harui]

On 9/19/16, 6:16 AM, "Mark Struberg"  wrote:


>We also need to check whether the author and contributor flags are
>properly moved over by the import. We don't like to loose any IP
>provenance... Etc, etc.

Isn't IP provenance reset by the SGA?  It was for Adobe Flex.  Only a
couple of committers came in with the 10 year old code base.  Everyone
else had moved on, but because all were employees of Adobe, it didn't
matter.  The log just says that someone from Adobe made a commit, not who.

-Alex


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic

[Ate Douma]

On 2016-09-19 16:33, Ate Douma wrote:

On 2016-09-19 15:44, John D. Ament wrote:

Ate,

Please also note the instructions from the incubator's retirement guide.

http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html


Right.
Thanks for pointing this out John.

I've never before had to handle a podling retirement and overlooked this
requires different handling from a TLP retirement.
And with slightly different consequences, e.g. website will be taken down,
instead of flagged as being retired.

So, to do this proper, I'll first cancel the vote thread on dev@streams
and open a new [FINAL][DISCUSS] thread for retirement again, this
time also pointing to the podling retirement page.
This way at least everyone on that list will have a proper notice what
the retirement entails.
(not that I expect a different outcome, but there is no rush either)


Reading the podling retirement guide a bit more thoroughly, I think I it is
sufficient to restart the [VOTE] thread for retirement on dev@streams with the
link to the podling retirement guide.



And after that I'll open the final [VOTE] for retirement here on general@

Ate



John

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM Ate Douma  wrote:


FYI, I've started below vote to retire Apache Streams, after I first
initiated a
[discuss] thread more than a week ago, which resulted in zero feedback.

Ate
(Streams mentor)

 Forwarded Message 
Subject: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 23:27:11 +0200
From: Ate Douma 
To: d...@streams.incubator.apache.org 

As a final follow up on the earlier [discuss] thread, lets formally vote on
retiring Apache Streams and move it to the attic.

The process is described at http://attic.apache.org/process.html

[ ] +1 Move Streams to the Attic
[ ] ±0 Proceed according to the majority
[ ] -1 Do not move Streams to the Attic, because... [please add
justification]

Ate



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org











-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Mark Struberg]

Linux never was on hg, so the comparison doesn't fit.

To be more clear: I'm not concerned that GIT cannot handle the NetBeans repo 
size. 

But we cannot guarantee yet that the import from hg to GIT doesn't loose 
important information or works at all.

Another  goal is to figure out if binaries got committed in the past. That 
would blow up the repo size but don't help us. Actually we might even be 
forbidden to have those binaries in our repo at the ASF... 


LieGrue,
strub





> On Monday, 19 September 2016, 16:08, Emmanuel Lécharny  
> wrote:
> > Le 19/09/16 à 15:16, Mark Struberg a écrit :
>>  To be honest: I was a bit worried when the github import blew up. That was 
> actually the main reason why I started a local import.
> Beside playing with the import tools for your own interest, I seriously
> doubt that importing the netbeans code base on our infrastructure could
> be an issue. Linux which is very likely to be a way bigger code base is
> already on git...
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic

[Ate Douma]

On 2016-09-19 15:44, John D. Ament wrote:

Ate,

Please also note the instructions from the incubator's retirement guide.

http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html


Right.
Thanks for pointing this out John.

I've never before had to handle a podling retirement and overlooked this
requires different handling from a TLP retirement.
And with slightly different consequences, e.g. website will be taken down,
instead of flagged as being retired.

So, to do this proper, I'll first cancel the vote thread on dev@streams
and open a new [FINAL][DISCUSS] thread for retirement again, this
time also pointing to the podling retirement page.
This way at least everyone on that list will have a proper notice what
the retirement entails.
(not that I expect a different outcome, but there is no rush either)

And after that I'll open the final [VOTE] for retirement here on general@

Ate



John

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM Ate Douma  wrote:


FYI, I've started below vote to retire Apache Streams, after I first
initiated a
[discuss] thread more than a week ago, which resulted in zero feedback.

Ate
(Streams mentor)

 Forwarded Message 
Subject: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 23:27:11 +0200
From: Ate Douma 
To: d...@streams.incubator.apache.org 

As a final follow up on the earlier [discuss] thread, lets formally vote on
retiring Apache Streams and move it to the attic.

The process is described at http://attic.apache.org/process.html

[ ] +1 Move Streams to the Attic
[ ] ±0 Proceed according to the majority
[ ] -1 Do not move Streams to the Attic, because... [please add
justification]

Ate



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org








-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic

[John D. Ament]

Ate,

Please also note the instructions from the incubator's retirement guide.

http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html

John

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:37 AM Ate Douma  wrote:

> FYI, I've started below vote to retire Apache Streams, after I first
> initiated a
> [discuss] thread more than a week ago, which resulted in zero feedback.
>
> Ate
> (Streams mentor)
>
>  Forwarded Message 
> Subject: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic
> Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 23:27:11 +0200
> From: Ate Douma 
> To: d...@streams.incubator.apache.org 
>
> As a final follow up on the earlier [discuss] thread, lets formally vote on
> retiring Apache Streams and move it to the attic.
>
> The process is described at http://attic.apache.org/process.html
>
> [ ] +1 Move Streams to the Attic
> [ ] ±0 Proceed according to the majority
> [ ] -1 Do not move Streams to the Attic, because... [please add
> justification]
>
> Ate
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Emmanuel Lécharny]

Le 19/09/16 à 13:10, Raphael Bircher a écrit :
> Hi Geertjan
>
> I'm registred at NetBeams now, to get a closer look at the project. I
> was a bit shocked about the similarities with the formar
> OpenOffice.org project. The structure of the Project, the workflow
> etc. are so close to the OpenOffice.org project, much closer as I
> expected. My biggest fear for the incubation is not the technical
> aspect. For infrastructure we will find solutions, and for many
> problems exist already blueprints from the OpenOffice Project. My
> biggest fear ist the community. As I saw on the NetBeans ML, the
> decision to join the ASF was made by Oracle. Well a load of the
> community members welcome this step, but there are also fears. This
> fears has to be addressed, this is very very important.
Can you list the feares you want to be addressed ?

>
> One Mail also complained about the Initial Committer list. Are all
> active committers who did commit in the last 6 month (or so) on the
> initial committer list. forgotten people can create bad blood and
> disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project.
>
> This are at the moment my biggest concerns.

It's up to the current committers to ask to be included in this list.
This happens for every single project with more than a few committers
that is being incubating.

The rational being that committers who haven't been active for a certain
period of time are likely to be not anymore interested in the project.
That's fine, nobody should be included if they don't care anymore, but
we should include anyone who has participated in the past and want to be
part of the incubating project. It's realy a no brainer.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Emmanuel Lécharny]

Le 19/09/16 à 15:16, Mark Struberg a écrit :
> To be honest: I was a bit worried when the github import blew up. That was 
> actually the main reason why I started a local import.
Beside playing with the import tools for your own interest, I seriously
doubt that importing the netbeans code base on our infrastructure could
be an issue. Linux which is very likely to be a way bigger code base is
already on git...


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Fwd: [VOTE] Release SAMOA 0.4.0 (incubating) RC1

[Nicolas Kourtellis]

Hi all,

Our new release has been voted from the Apache SAMOA team and we are
opening the vote to the incubator email list for testing.

Please vote on releasing the following release candidate as Apache
SAMOA (incubating)
version 0.4.0. This release will be the second release for SAMOA in the
incubator.

-
The commit to be voted on is in the branch "releases/0.4.0-incubating"
(commit fc39238dd7d3674c069a8142312da8c1812bc907):
https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-samoa/
repo?p=incubator-samoa.git;a=commit;h=fc39238dd7d3674c069a8142312da8
c1812bc907

Tag v0.4.0-incubating:
https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-samoa/
repo?p=incubator-samoa.git;a=tag;h=aa5bd941ccbed1aabb46b8119049ac1bb293c3a2

Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
*https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/nkourtellis.asc
*

The staging repository for this release can be found at:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/staging/
org/apache/samoa/samoa/0.4.0-incubating/

The developer's version artifacts:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/samoa/0.4.0-incubating-rc1/

-

Please vote on releasing this package as Apache SAMOA 0.4.0 (incubating).

The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of at least
three +1 PPMC votes are cast.

[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache SAMOA 0.4.0 (incubating)
[ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...

I'm +1 on the release.

Cheers,

Nicolas



-- 
Nicolas Kourtellis

Fwd: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic

[Ate Douma]

FYI, I've started below vote to retire Apache Streams, after I first initiated a
[discuss] thread more than a week ago, which resulted in zero feedback.

Ate
(Streams mentor)

 Forwarded Message 
Subject: [VOTE] Retire Apache Streams to the attic
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 23:27:11 +0200
From: Ate Douma 
To: d...@streams.incubator.apache.org 

As a final follow up on the earlier [discuss] thread, lets formally vote on
retiring Apache Streams and move it to the attic.

The process is described at http://attic.apache.org/process.html

[ ] +1 Move Streams to the Attic
[ ] ±0 Proceed according to the majority
[ ] -1 Do not move Streams to the Attic, because... [please add justification]

Ate



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Request to be added to ContributorsGroup on MoinMoin wiki

[John D. Ament]

Bruce,

Whats your username?  Each wiki requires separate accounts.

John

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:30 AM Bruce Snyder  wrote:

> Please consider this a request to be added to the ContributorsGroup on the
> MoinMoin wiki at wiki.apache.org. I need to edit the RocketMQ proposal and
> currently I have no edit capability.
>
> Bruce
>
> --
> perl -e 'print
> unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E
> ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
> Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ 
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder
>

Request to be added to ContributorsGroup on MoinMoin wiki

[Bruce Snyder]

Please consider this a request to be added to the ContributorsGroup on the
MoinMoin wiki at wiki.apache.org. I need to edit the RocketMQ proposal and
currently I have no edit capability.

Bruce

-- 
perl -e 'print
unpack("u30","D0G)U8V4\@4VYY9&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E
Twitter: http://twitter.com/brucesnyder

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Michael Müller]

Hmm, as far as  I know the biggest problem of OpenOffice had been licensing.
ASFAIK LibreOffice's success is a different license which allows to incorporate 
more  sources.

I'm not a licensing specialist. I hope, wie wohnt geht problems.
-- 
Herzliche Grüße, Best regards
Michael Müller

Twitter: @muellermi
Blog: blog.mueller-bruehl.de
Web Development with Java and JSF: leanpub.com/jsf
Java Lambdas and Parallel Streams: leanpub.com/lambdas


Am 19. September 2016 14:52:16 MESZ, schrieb Geertjan Wielenga 
:
>On 19.09.2016 1:10, Raphael Bircher wrote:
>
>> My biggest fear ist the community. As I saw on the NetBeans ML, the
>> decision to join the ASF was made by Oracle. Well a load of the
>> community members welcome this step, but there are also fears. This
>> fears has to be addressed, this is very very important.
>
>
>You are right. There are mixed feelings about this move. However, by
>far
>the majority are strongly in favor. Yesterday at JavaOne, we discussed
>this
>move at length in a number of sessions and James Gosling, the most
>respected individual contributor on the initial committers list (who
>sent
>his ICL the second he was invited to join the project, i.e., even
>before
>the proposal was submitted) said he is "unspeakably thrilled" about
>NetBeans in the context of Apache.
>
>Indeed, there are going to be people who are negative about this. Some
>have
>said that Apache is a "burial ground". I disagree with that and I think
>that is nonsense. However, just because one or two people say that does
>not
>mean I think any differently about Apache.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Geertjan
>
>On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Raphael Bircher
>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Geertjan
>>
>> I'm registred at NetBeams now, to get a closer look at the project. I
>> was a bit shocked about the similarities with the formar
>> OpenOffice.org project. The structure of the Project, the workflow
>> etc. are so close to the OpenOffice.org project, much closer as I
>> expected. My biggest fear for the incubation is not the technical
>> aspect. For infrastructure we will find solutions, and for many
>> problems exist already blueprints from the OpenOffice Project. My
>> biggest fear ist the community. As I saw on the NetBeans ML, the
>> decision to join the ASF was made by Oracle. Well a load of the
>> community members welcome this step, but there are also fears. This
>> fears has to be addressed, this is very very important.
>>
>> One Mail also complained about the Initial Committer list. Are all
>> active committers who did commit in the last 6 month (or so) on the
>> initial committer list. forgotten people can create bad blood and
>> disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project.
>>
>> This are at the moment my biggest concerns.
>>
>> Regards Raphael
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
>>  wrote:
>> > Nightly builds is all that's needed, indeed, no one needs to
>announce
>> them,
>> > they should simply be available. Agreed it's important to
>distinguish
>> > between nightly builds and official releases, that's exactly how
>NetBeans
>> > works currently. The #1 requirement here is that there should be
>nightly
>> > builds and that is supported, from your response here.
>> >
>> > Geertjan
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
>> > bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
>> >>  wrote:
>> >> > ...the #1 requirement is for Apache NetBeans to be able
>> >> > to produce daily/release builds and to upload them to
>netbeans.org or
>> >> > another download area under Apache
>> >>
>> >> Daily releases are problematic in Apache projects as the PMC needs
>to
>> >> approve releases, and in general those votes last at least 72
>hours
>> >> due to our async collaboration model.
>> >>
>> >> AFAIK Apache Cordova for example is making very frequent releases,
>it
>> >> might be interesting to find out how they enable that, in due
>time.
>> >>
>> >> Nightly builds should not be announced outside of the project's
>> >> developers mailing lists, to mark a clear line between those and
>> >> official releases.
>> >>
>> >> All those things can be discussed during incubation of course,
>just
>> >> wanted to mention them due to the above #1 requirement.
>> >>
>> >> -Bertrand
>> >>
>> >>
>-
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Mark Struberg]

Indeed, this is currently just to get an idea about whether it is technically 
possible at all and how 'expensive' it is.

I'd like to look at the size of the git repo. There might be binaries, jars etc 
which got committed over time. Those might need to get filtered out to 
streamline the repo etc. 


We also might do a full import and then git-filter it in a second step to 
create a baseline repo for further development.


We also need to check whether the author and contributor flags are properly 
moved over by the import. We don't like to loose any IP provenance... Etc, etc.

To be honest: I was a bit worried when the github import blew up. That was 
actually the main reason why I started a local import.

LieGrue,
strub



On Monday, 19 September 2016, 15:08, Geertjan Wielenga 
 wrote:
>
>
>On 19.09.2016 11:42 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:  
>If I succeed then I'll push it to github.
>
>
>From the NetBeans side, we assume this is basically an experiment at this 
>stage - we will look at the results and this is a very interesting experiment.
>
>
>There could be different approaches. For example, when doing a conversion of 
>this scale, we think it could be appropriate to consider splitting the 
>repository into several smaller repositories. It is not completely clear how 
>to split it, we could discuss different approaches, but we could start with a 
>split per cluster and then doing adjustments as needed.
>
>
>In all cases, we would strongly suggest to keep history, but we assume you are 
>keeping it. 
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>
>Geertjan
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Mark Struberg  
>wrote:
>
>quick update.
>>
>>
>>hg cloned it locally and now batch importing over here.
>>The hg clone took me 3 hours and the import is now running for 4 hours.
>>
>>Maybe that is the problem why github failed.
>>
>>I'm now at 89000/303000 in the import step.
>>
>>If I succeed then I'll push it to github.
>>
>>LieGrue,
>>strub
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sunday, 18 September 2016, 18:24, Mark Struberg 
>>>  wrote:
>>> > btw, I tried to import the netbeans-core repo from hg into github and it 
>>> > failed.
>>> Now trying to manually import it...
>>>
>>> Did anybody else do that?
>>>
>>>
>>> LieGrue,
>>> strub
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
  On Sunday, 18 September 2016, 18:22, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>>  wrote:
  > +1


>   -Original Message-
>   From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
>   Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 00:46
>   To: general@incubator.apache.org
>   Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal
>
>   On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
>   geertjan.wielenga@googlemail. com> wrote:
>
>   > Hi all,
>   >
>   > Can we be specific about what info is needed, or what further
>>> details
>   > specifically, before going into a vote for acceptance of the
>>> proposal?
>   My
>   > concern is that each question we answer is answered by further
>   questions to
>   > answer. Maybe we could do a phone conference with the NetBeans
>   > infrastructure side together with the Apache infrastructure side.
>   Maybe we
>   > can work through the infrastructure challenges during incubation.
>   >
>
>   Generally speaking, Apache would prefer to slow things down and use a
>   mailing list, rather than to have a phone conference. The email is
>   documented for everybody to review, to participate, and to record for
>   future examination. A phone conference probably wouldn't resolve
>>> many
>   questions/concerns anyway, simply because much of that comes from
>   considered thought. A phone call is "THINK NOW. RESPOND. OOPS.
>>> MISSED
>   YOUR
>   CHANCE." ... Mailing lists give people time to think.
>
>   There is no rush, no dates, no deadlines at the ASF. It may take
>>> longer
>   via
>   mailing lists, but it means that the larger community can be involved,
>   can
>   review, and can be archived.
>
>   If one question turns into three ... well, that is deliberation. As
>   David
>   noted else-thread, we rarely get such a large, well-established
>   community
>   arriving at the Incubator. That necessitates a bit more inquiry than
>   most
>   other entrants receive. Layers of the onion get peeled, and new
>   questions
>   arrive. More layers unpeeled ...
>
>   And to point to the elephant in the room: I bet there are people
>   concerned
>   given the recent misadventures of AOO [and Oracle's donations of
>>> these
>   two
>   projects]. Personally, I think it is hogwash, and don't believe
>>> any
>   concern
>   applies here, as the communities and the userbase are very different.
>   BUT,
>   temporally, there is a conflation of the 

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Geertjan Wielenga]

On 19.09.2016 11:42 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:

> If I succeed then I'll push it to github.


>From the NetBeans side, we assume this is basically an experiment at this
stage - we will look at the results and this is a very interesting
experiment.

There could be different approaches. For example, when doing a conversion
of this scale, we think it could be appropriate to consider splitting the
repository into several smaller repositories. It is not completely clear
how to split it, we could discuss different approaches, but we could start
with a split per cluster and then doing adjustments as needed.

In all cases, we would strongly suggest to keep history, but we assume you
are keeping it.

Thanks,

Geertjan




On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Mark Struberg 
wrote:

> quick update.
>
>
> hg cloned it locally and now batch importing over here.
> The hg clone took me 3 hours and the import is now running for 4 hours.
>
> Maybe that is the problem why github failed.
>
> I'm now at 89000/303000 in the import step.
>
> If I succeed then I'll push it to github.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sunday, 18 September 2016, 18:24, Mark Struberg
>  wrote:
> > > btw, I tried to import the netbeans-core repo from hg into github and
> it failed.
> > Now trying to manually import it...
> >
> > Did anybody else do that?
> >
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>  On Sunday, 18 September 2016, 18:22, Dennis E. Hamilton
> >  wrote:
> >>  > +1
> >>
> >>
> >>>   -Original Message-
> >>>   From: Greg Stein [mailto:gst...@gmail.com]
> >>>   Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 00:46
> >>>   To: general@incubator.apache.org
> >>>   Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal
> >>>
> >>>   On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Geertjan Wielenga <
> >>>   geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>   > Hi all,
> >>>   >
> >>>   > Can we be specific about what info is needed, or what further
> > details
> >>>   > specifically, before going into a vote for acceptance of the
> > proposal?
> >>>   My
> >>>   > concern is that each question we answer is answered by further
> >>>   questions to
> >>>   > answer. Maybe we could do a phone conference with the NetBeans
> >>>   > infrastructure side together with the Apache infrastructure side.
> >>>   Maybe we
> >>>   > can work through the infrastructure challenges during incubation.
> >>>   >
> >>>
> >>>   Generally speaking, Apache would prefer to slow things down and use a
> >>>   mailing list, rather than to have a phone conference. The email is
> >>>   documented for everybody to review, to participate, and to record for
> >>>   future examination. A phone conference probably wouldn't resolve
> > many
> >>>   questions/concerns anyway, simply because much of that comes from
> >>>   considered thought. A phone call is "THINK NOW. RESPOND. OOPS.
> > MISSED
> >>>   YOUR
> >>>   CHANCE." ... Mailing lists give people time to think.
> >>>
> >>>   There is no rush, no dates, no deadlines at the ASF. It may take
> > longer
> >>>   via
> >>>   mailing lists, but it means that the larger community can be
> involved,
> >>>   can
> >>>   review, and can be archived.
> >>>
> >>>   If one question turns into three ... well, that is deliberation. As
> >>>   David
> >>>   noted else-thread, we rarely get such a large, well-established
> >>>   community
> >>>   arriving at the Incubator. That necessitates a bit more inquiry than
> >>>   most
> >>>   other entrants receive. Layers of the onion get peeled, and new
> >>>   questions
> >>>   arrive. More layers unpeeled ...
> >>>
> >>>   And to point to the elephant in the room: I bet there are people
> >>>   concerned
> >>>   given the recent misadventures of AOO [and Oracle's donations of
> > these
> >>>   two
> >>>   projects]. Personally, I think it is hogwash, and don't believe
> > any
> >>>   concern
> >>>   applies here, as the communities and the userbase are very different.
> >>>   BUT,
> >>>   temporally, there is a conflation of the donations of these two
> >>>   projects. I
> >>>   suspect that will cause a few people to slow down and ask more
> >>>   questions.
> >>>
> >>>   Cheers,
> >>>   -g
> >>
> >>
> >>  -
> >>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >>  For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >>
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Geertjan Wielenga]

On 18.09.2016 9:46 AM, Greg Stein wrote:

> There is no rush, no dates, no deadlines at the ASF. It may take longer via
> mailing lists, but it means that the larger community can be involved, can
> review, and can be archived.



Makes sense -- and indeed the more details we have up front the better, the
more we can scope out what needs to be done, the better.

Thanks,

Geertjan

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Geertjan Wielenga]

On 19.09.2016 1:10, Raphael Bircher wrote:

> My biggest fear ist the community. As I saw on the NetBeans ML, the
> decision to join the ASF was made by Oracle. Well a load of the
> community members welcome this step, but there are also fears. This
> fears has to be addressed, this is very very important.


You are right. There are mixed feelings about this move. However, by far
the majority are strongly in favor. Yesterday at JavaOne, we discussed this
move at length in a number of sessions and James Gosling, the most
respected individual contributor on the initial committers list (who sent
his ICL the second he was invited to join the project, i.e., even before
the proposal was submitted) said he is "unspeakably thrilled" about
NetBeans in the context of Apache.

Indeed, there are going to be people who are negative about this. Some have
said that Apache is a "burial ground". I disagree with that and I think
that is nonsense. However, just because one or two people say that does not
mean I think any differently about Apache.

Thanks,

Geertjan

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Raphael Bircher 
wrote:

> Hi Geertjan
>
> I'm registred at NetBeams now, to get a closer look at the project. I
> was a bit shocked about the similarities with the formar
> OpenOffice.org project. The structure of the Project, the workflow
> etc. are so close to the OpenOffice.org project, much closer as I
> expected. My biggest fear for the incubation is not the technical
> aspect. For infrastructure we will find solutions, and for many
> problems exist already blueprints from the OpenOffice Project. My
> biggest fear ist the community. As I saw on the NetBeans ML, the
> decision to join the ASF was made by Oracle. Well a load of the
> community members welcome this step, but there are also fears. This
> fears has to be addressed, this is very very important.
>
> One Mail also complained about the Initial Committer list. Are all
> active committers who did commit in the last 6 month (or so) on the
> initial committer list. forgotten people can create bad blood and
> disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project.
>
> This are at the moment my biggest concerns.
>
> Regards Raphael
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
>  wrote:
> > Nightly builds is all that's needed, indeed, no one needs to announce
> them,
> > they should simply be available. Agreed it's important to distinguish
> > between nightly builds and official releases, that's exactly how NetBeans
> > works currently. The #1 requirement here is that there should be nightly
> > builds and that is supported, from your response here.
> >
> > Geertjan
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> > bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
> >>  wrote:
> >> > ...the #1 requirement is for Apache NetBeans to be able
> >> > to produce daily/release builds and to upload them to netbeans.org or
> >> > another download area under Apache
> >>
> >> Daily releases are problematic in Apache projects as the PMC needs to
> >> approve releases, and in general those votes last at least 72 hours
> >> due to our async collaboration model.
> >>
> >> AFAIK Apache Cordova for example is making very frequent releases, it
> >> might be interesting to find out how they enable that, in due time.
> >>
> >> Nightly builds should not be announced outside of the project's
> >> developers mailing lists, to mark a clear line between those and
> >> official releases.
> >>
> >> All those things can be discussed during incubation of course, just
> >> wanted to mention them due to the above #1 requirement.
> >>
> >> -Bertrand
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Geertjan Wielenga]

On 19.09.2016 1:10, Raphael Bircher wrote:

> One Mail also complained about the Initial Committer list. Are all
> active committers who did commit in the last 6 month (or so) on the
> initial committer list. forgotten people can create bad blood and
> disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project.


Hello Rapael,

This really is not a problem. :-) If we were to have included everyone who
has committed to NetBeans over the past 6 months, plus all the others who
should really be on the initial committers list, we would have had hundreds
of initial committers. :-) We decided to keep the initial committers list
short and focused on showing that there's an Oracle commitment as well as
commitment from individual contributors from a number of different
companies [and in several cases multiple individual contributors from the
same company].

There are a number of complications in this proposal, indeed, though this
is not one of them.

Hope that clarifies.

Geertjan

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Raphael Bircher 
wrote:

> Hi Geertjan
>
> I'm registred at NetBeams now, to get a closer look at the project. I
> was a bit shocked about the similarities with the formar
> OpenOffice.org project. The structure of the Project, the workflow
> etc. are so close to the OpenOffice.org project, much closer as I
> expected. My biggest fear for the incubation is not the technical
> aspect. For infrastructure we will find solutions, and for many
> problems exist already blueprints from the OpenOffice Project. My
> biggest fear ist the community. As I saw on the NetBeans ML, the
> decision to join the ASF was made by Oracle. Well a load of the
> community members welcome this step, but there are also fears. This
> fears has to be addressed, this is very very important.
>
> One Mail also complained about the Initial Committer list. Are all
> active committers who did commit in the last 6 month (or so) on the
> initial committer list. forgotten people can create bad blood and
> disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project.
>
> This are at the moment my biggest concerns.
>
> Regards Raphael
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
>  wrote:
> > Nightly builds is all that's needed, indeed, no one needs to announce
> them,
> > they should simply be available. Agreed it's important to distinguish
> > between nightly builds and official releases, that's exactly how NetBeans
> > works currently. The #1 requirement here is that there should be nightly
> > builds and that is supported, from your response here.
> >
> > Geertjan
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> > bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
> >>  wrote:
> >> > ...the #1 requirement is for Apache NetBeans to be able
> >> > to produce daily/release builds and to upload them to netbeans.org or
> >> > another download area under Apache
> >>
> >> Daily releases are problematic in Apache projects as the PMC needs to
> >> approve releases, and in general those votes last at least 72 hours
> >> due to our async collaboration model.
> >>
> >> AFAIK Apache Cordova for example is making very frequent releases, it
> >> might be interesting to find out how they enable that, in due time.
> >>
> >> Nightly builds should not be announced outside of the project's
> >> developers mailing lists, to mark a clear line between those and
> >> official releases.
> >>
> >> All those things can be discussed during incubation of course, just
> >> wanted to mention them due to the above #1 requirement.
> >>
> >> -Bertrand
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

[Raphael Bircher]

Hi Geertjan

I'm registred at NetBeams now, to get a closer look at the project. I
was a bit shocked about the similarities with the formar
OpenOffice.org project. The structure of the Project, the workflow
etc. are so close to the OpenOffice.org project, much closer as I
expected. My biggest fear for the incubation is not the technical
aspect. For infrastructure we will find solutions, and for many
problems exist already blueprints from the OpenOffice Project. My
biggest fear ist the community. As I saw on the NetBeans ML, the
decision to join the ASF was made by Oracle. Well a load of the
community members welcome this step, but there are also fears. This
fears has to be addressed, this is very very important.

One Mail also complained about the Initial Committer list. Are all
active committers who did commit in the last 6 month (or so) on the
initial committer list. forgotten people can create bad blood and
disappointment. The committers are the most value part of a project.

This are at the moment my biggest concerns.

Regards Raphael

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
 wrote:
> Nightly builds is all that's needed, indeed, no one needs to announce them,
> they should simply be available. Agreed it's important to distinguish
> between nightly builds and official releases, that's exactly how NetBeans
> works currently. The #1 requirement here is that there should be nightly
> builds and that is supported, from your response here.
>
> Geertjan
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:00 AM, Geertjan Wielenga
>>  wrote:
>> > ...the #1 requirement is for Apache NetBeans to be able
>> > to produce daily/release builds and to upload them to netbeans.org or
>> > another download area under Apache
>>
>> Daily releases are problematic in Apache projects as the PMC needs to
>> approve releases, and in general those votes last at least 72 hours
>> due to our async collaboration model.
>>
>> AFAIK Apache Cordova for example is making very frequent releases, it
>> might be interesting to find out how they enable that, in due time.
>>
>> Nightly builds should not be announced outside of the project's
>> developers mailing lists, to mark a clear line between those and
>> official releases.
>>
>> All those things can be discussed during incubation of course, just
>> wanted to mention them due to the above #1 requirement.
>>
>> -Bertrand
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org