Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[Lionel Liu]

Thanks Justin and Matt, then we'll clean up the unbundled dependencies'
licenses for our source release.

Thanks,
Lionel

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Matt Sicker  wrote:

> On 12 April 2018 at 22:43, Lionel Liu  wrote:
> >
> > 2. Only things that are actually bundled in the release should be
> mentioned
> > in LICENSE. [3][4]
> >
> > To my understanding, as a source release, all the dependencies are
> bundled
> > when it is built.
> > The dependencies are not bundled in the source code, so we don't need to
> > announce any dependencies' licenses in source release?
> >
>
> The idea here is that the LICENSE file only needs to include licenses for
> anything that is included in that archive file. So for instance, if you
> have source files that are all developed at Apache and have dependencies
> that aren't included in the source zip, then you have the most simple
> distribution possible here. If you have source files that are licensed
> differently (e.g., copied code from an MIT licensed library), then things
> start to get complicated. As it is, your source license and notice should
> be relatively minimal right now since you're not bundling external
> dependencies in said source distribution.
>
> As for the JSON licensing issue, just take a look at the license. It says
> it can't be used for evil. While amusing, that's a terrible restriction to
> place on end users because it's extremely vague and violates the tenants of
> free software.
>
> --
> Matt Sicker 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[Matt Sicker]

On 12 April 2018 at 22:43, Lionel Liu  wrote:
>
> 2. Only things that are actually bundled in the release should be mentioned
> in LICENSE. [3][4]
>
> To my understanding, as a source release, all the dependencies are bundled
> when it is built.
> The dependencies are not bundled in the source code, so we don't need to
> announce any dependencies' licenses in source release?
>

The idea here is that the LICENSE file only needs to include licenses for
anything that is included in that archive file. So for instance, if you
have source files that are all developed at Apache and have dependencies
that aren't included in the source zip, then you have the most simple
distribution possible here. If you have source files that are licensed
differently (e.g., copied code from an MIT licensed library), then things
start to get complicated. As it is, your source license and notice should
be relatively minimal right now since you're not bundling external
dependencies in said source distribution.

As for the JSON licensing issue, just take a look at the license. It says
it can't be used for evil. While amusing, that's a terrible restriction to
place on end users because it's extremely vague and violates the tenants of
free software.

-- 
Matt Sicker 

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> I reviewed this JSON license we've mentioned in license file: (The JSON 
> License) JSON in Java (org.json:json:20140107 - 
> https://github.com/douglascrockford/JSON-java 
> )
> It is transitive dependency from org.apache.hive:hive-metastore:jar:1.2.1 
> (The Apache Software License, Version 2.0), we use hive metastore APIs and 
> mentioned in pom.xml, but did not use org.json libraries directly. And it is 
> bundled after built in runtime.
> - I also checked license file of hive, it announced JSON license for org.json 
> library. (https://github.com/apache/hive/blob/release-1.2.1/LICENSE#L308 
> )

JSON license was made a category X license a year or two ago. [1] [2] ALv2 
content depends on something with a category X license unless it’s optional or 
for some build tools. [3] PMC’s were given some time to comply with this and 
perhaps a more recent version of Hive does?

> For those CDDL and EPL licenses dependencies, we also just need them in 
> runtime.

And being category B that would be fine but they shouldn’t be mentioned in the 
source license. [4] The license file for the source release and the binary is 
likely to be different.

> The dependencies are not bundled in the source code, so we don't need to 
> announce any dependencies' licenses in source release?

Correct.

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#json
2. 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/195d6e14bbcfcbb8d0a90492a81b311efaa5d6d15bc81b239a32dcb7@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
3. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#prohibited
4. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[Lionel Liu]

Hi Justin,

Thanks a lot for your review, I have some questions:

1. The source LICENSE mentions:
- JSON licensed software - this is category X and can’t be dependancy even
if it is not included in the source release. [1]
- CDDL and EPL license software there are category B and cannot be included
in a source release. [2]

I reviewed this JSON license we've mentioned in license file: (The JSON
License) JSON in Java (org.json:json:20140107 -
https://github.com/douglascrockford/JSON-java)
It is transitive dependency from org.apache.hive:hive-metastore:jar:1.2.1
(The Apache Software License, Version 2.0), we use hive metastore APIs and
mentioned in pom.xml, but did not use org.json libraries directly. And it
is bundled after built in runtime.
- I also checked license file of hive, it announced JSON license for
org.json library. (
https://github.com/apache/hive/blob/release-1.2.1/LICENSE#L308)
For those CDDL and EPL licenses dependencies, we also just need them in
runtime.

2. Only things that are actually bundled in the release should be mentioned
in LICENSE. [3][4]

To my understanding, as a source release, all the dependencies are bundled
when it is built.
The dependencies are not bundled in the source code, so we don't need to
announce any dependencies' licenses in source release?

Actually, in the Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC1] release vote process, we've
receive an email from John D. Ament:
-
On mine I get 3 files failing

Unapproved licenses:

  DEPENDENCIES
  griffin-doc/service/postman/griffin.json
  griffin-doc/service/postman/griffin_environment.json

Doing what I assume is the same thing as Matt (mvn apache-rat:check from
the source release folder) . In addition to what he's noted, the year in
your NOTICE file should be updated to 2018.  The resulting output files
need a little bit of work:

- measure's JAR shows the notice for Avro.  It also packs in additional
dependencies that are not apache licensed (they're all Cat B so they're
fine).  In the next release, please create dedicated NOTICE and LICENSE
files for this JAR.
- Similar issues exist in the service JAR, where the spring boot JAR
includes many other dependencies, some of which carry their own NOTICE
(Jackson, Tomcat) or other licenses.  What's harder is that you're using
Hibernate, which is an LGPL Cat-X dependency and cannot be included in the
JAR.  This is going to have to come out.
- The resulting output from your UI build should have licenses in place for
font awesome, glyphicons.  I'm not sure whats in your vendor.min.js but
based on your node_modules you may need to call out additional
license/notice contents.


Sorry, but -1.
-

In the comments, we also did not bundle any dependencies in source code,
they are just bundled after built.
It seems like we should announce the licenses of dependencies in built
jars, even if we only released the source code package.

*Now I'm confused about this, would you give me some suggestions? *

Thanks,
Lionel



On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:49 AM, Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> -1 binding
>
> The source LICENSE mentions:
> - JSON licensed software - this is category X and can’t be dependancy even
> if it is not included in the source release. [1]
> - CDDL and EPL license software there are category B and cannot be
> included in a source release. [2]
>
> Only things that are actually bundled in the release should be mentioned
> in LICENSE. [3][4]
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b
> 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#guiding-principle
> 4 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundled-vs-non-bundled
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Omid 0.9.0.0 (incubating)

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

-1 binding as NOTICE is incorrect. The NOTICE file need to be keep as small as 
possible [1]

I checked:
- incubating in file name
- signatures good although it would be best to sign with an apache.org email 
address
- LICENSE is fine
- NOTICE file contains wrong year (2016) and incorrectly lists files that have 
3rd party ALv2 headers. Where did these files come from? It looks like here [4] 
which has a NOTICE file [4]
- a couple of files are missing ASF headers [2][3]
- no unexpected binary files
- Can't compile from source. Looks like I have a newer version of protobuf. May 
be an issue for other people as well?

Not 100% certain but I think that the NOTICE file [5] needs to be taken into 
account, however it may be that the version of the files you have were taken 
when no NOTICE files existed? (It was committed in 2014? and the copyright is 
2010 on those files.)

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
2. 
apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src/tso-server/src/main/resources/default-omid-server-configuration.yml
3. 
apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src/benchmarks/src/main/resources/default-tso-server-benchmark-config.yml
4.https://github.com/linkedin/MTBT/
5. https://github.com/linkedin/MTBT/blob/master/NOTICE
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[William Guo]

Thanks for your inputs.

ok, we will go through and check our license.


Thanks,
William


On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:53 AM, Matt Sicker  wrote:

> On 12 April 2018 at 18:49, Justin Mclean  wrote:
>
> > The source LICENSE mentions:
> > - JSON licensed software - this is category X and can’t be dependancy
> even
> > if it is not included in the source release. [1]
> > - CDDL and EPL license software there are category B and cannot be
> > included in a source release. [2]
> >
>
> These are binary dependencies only. I believe their license file in the
> source distribution is incorrect.
>
>
> > Only things that are actually bundled in the release should be mentioned
> > in LICENSE. [3][4]
> >
>
> With this issue, I'm switching to -1 as well.
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker 
>

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[Matt Sicker]

On 12 April 2018 at 18:49, Justin Mclean  wrote:

> The source LICENSE mentions:
> - JSON licensed software - this is category X and can’t be dependancy even
> if it is not included in the source release. [1]
> - CDDL and EPL license software there are category B and cannot be
> included in a source release. [2]
>

These are binary dependencies only. I believe their license file in the
source distribution is incorrect.


> Only things that are actually bundled in the release should be mentioned
> in LICENSE. [3][4]
>

With this issue, I'm switching to -1 as well.


-- 
Matt Sicker 

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[William Guo]

Hi Dave,

For those GPL+CDDL dependencies, we are not packaging them in source
release.

Thanks,
William

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 7:31 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:

>
> On Apr 9, 2018, at 10:53 PM, William Guo  wrote:
>
> +1
>
>
> rat passed.
>
> sha1 checked.
>
> all GPL are dual licensed either CDDL or 'Apache License version 2.0’
>
>
> Please see https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>
> Is the GPL that is dual licensed CDDL included as an optional binary or is
> it source code?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
>
> Checked all suspicious license, looks good.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> William
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Lionel Liu  wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>The Apache Griffin community has voted on and approved a proposal to
> release Apache Griffin 0.2.0-rc3.
>We now kindly request that the Incubator PMC members review and vote on
> this incubator release candidate.
>
>Apache Griffin is data quality service for modern data system, it
> defines a standard process to define, measure data quality for well-known
> dimensions. With Apache Griffin, users will be able to quickly define their
> data quality requirements and then get the result in near real time in
> systematical approach.
>
>
>Griffin vote thread
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c9c9dd2cbea2d479625cd2a2c82345
> 41022c60f35f423ceb150d7ecb@%3Cdev.griffin.apache.org%3E
>Griffin vote result thread
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/bc1b2a436119d91c4cf1175a80d6fd
> 4e4b084749c9e6e259817144be@%3Cdev.griffin.apache.org%3E
>
>The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found
> at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/0.2.0-incubating
>
>The tag to be voted upon is 0.2.0-incubating:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-griffin.
> git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/griffin-0.2.0-incubating
>
>The release hash is :
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-griffin.
> git;a=commit;h=70419c4f4ec01dd70815d9480ab596b320fa5e2a
>
>The Nexus Staging URL:
>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachegriffin-1013
>
>Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>7F00C3BA90F3ECAEECB843A79BD6EC6C02379561
>
>KEYS file available:
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/KEYS
>
>For information about the contents of this release, see:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/0.
> 2.0-incubating/CHANGES.txt
>
>
>Please download the release candidate and evaluate the necessary items
> including checking hashes, signatures, build from source, run and test.
>Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Griffin
> 0.2.0-incubating
>The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Griffin 0.2.0-incubating
>[ ] +0 no opinion
>[ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
>
>
> Thanks,
> Lionel
> on behalf of Apache Griffin PPMC
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

-1 binding

The source LICENSE mentions:
- JSON licensed software - this is category X and can’t be dependancy even if 
it is not included in the source release. [1]
- CDDL and EPL license software there are category B and cannot be included in 
a source release. [2]

Only things that are actually bundled in the release should be mentioned in 
LICENSE. [3][4]

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
2. https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b
3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#guiding-principle
4 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundled-vs-non-bundled
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[Dave Fisher]

> On Apr 9, 2018, at 10:53 PM, William Guo  wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> 
> rat passed.
> 
> sha1 checked.
> 
> all GPL are dual licensed either CDDL or 'Apache License version 2.0’

Please see https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html 


Is the GPL that is dual licensed CDDL included as an optional binary or is it 
source code?

Regards,
Dave


> 
> Checked all suspicious license, looks good.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> William
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Lionel Liu  wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>>The Apache Griffin community has voted on and approved a proposal to
>> release Apache Griffin 0.2.0-rc3.
>>We now kindly request that the Incubator PMC members review and vote on
>> this incubator release candidate.
>> 
>>Apache Griffin is data quality service for modern data system, it
>> defines a standard process to define, measure data quality for well-known
>> dimensions. With Apache Griffin, users will be able to quickly define their
>> data quality requirements and then get the result in near real time in
>> systematical approach.
>> 
>> 
>>Griffin vote thread
>> 
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c9c9dd2cbea2d479625cd2a2c82345
>> 41022c60f35f423ceb150d7ecb@%3Cdev.griffin.apache.org%3E
>>Griffin vote result thread
>> 
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/bc1b2a436119d91c4cf1175a80d6fd
>> 4e4b084749c9e6e259817144be@%3Cdev.griffin.apache.org%3E
>> 
>>The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found
>> at:
>> 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/0.2.0-incubating
>> 
>>The tag to be voted upon is 0.2.0-incubating:
>> 
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-griffin.
>> git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/griffin-0.2.0-incubating
>> 
>>The release hash is :
>> 
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-griffin.
>> git;a=commit;h=70419c4f4ec01dd70815d9480ab596b320fa5e2a
>> 
>>The Nexus Staging URL:
>>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
>> orgapachegriffin-1013
>> 
>>Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>>7F00C3BA90F3ECAEECB843A79BD6EC6C02379561
>> 
>>KEYS file available:
>>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/KEYS
>> 
>>For information about the contents of this release, see:
>> 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/0.
>> 2.0-incubating/CHANGES.txt
>> 
>> 
>>Please download the release candidate and evaluate the necessary items
>> including checking hashes, signatures, build from source, run and test.
>>Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Griffin
>> 0.2.0-incubating
>>The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>[ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Griffin 0.2.0-incubating
>>[ ] +0 no opinion
>>[ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Lionel
>> on behalf of Apache Griffin PPMC
>> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Griffin-0.2.0-incubating [RC3]

[William Guo]

hi guys,

We need your help to verify our release,

Could you please spend some time to vote for us if you are free at the
moment.

Thanks,
William

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:07 AM, Matt Sicker  wrote:

> * Signatures ok
> * Disclaimer, notice, license ok
>   - As an aside, I like the formatting used in the license file.
> * Not exactly sure why you distribute the KEYS file with your sources, but
> it's not a problem. Keys inside the artifact can't be used to verify the
> artifact.
> * Rat check ok
> * Builds/tests ok
>
> +1
>
> I'll note that I was initially confused by your license file as none of the
> projects mentioned in it are bundled in the source distribution, but I see
> the service jar does bundle all dependencies where said license file would
> be relevant.
>
> On 10 April 2018 at 00:53, William Guo  wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> > rat passed.
> >
> > sha1 checked.
> >
> > all GPL are dual licensed either CDDL or 'Apache License version 2.0'
> >
> > Checked all suspicious license, looks good.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > William
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Lionel Liu 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > > The Apache Griffin community has voted on and approved a proposal
> to
> > > release Apache Griffin 0.2.0-rc3.
> > > We now kindly request that the Incubator PMC members review and
> vote
> > on
> > > this incubator release candidate.
> > >
> > > Apache Griffin is data quality service for modern data system, it
> > > defines a standard process to define, measure data quality for
> well-known
> > > dimensions. With Apache Griffin, users will be able to quickly define
> > their
> > > data quality requirements and then get the result in near real time in
> > > systematical approach.
> > >
> > >
> > > Griffin vote thread
> > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c9c9dd2cbea2d479625cd2a2c82345
> > > 41022c60f35f423ceb150d7ecb@%3Cdev.griffin.apache.org%3E
> > > Griffin vote result thread
> > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/bc1b2a436119d91c4cf1175a80d6fd
> > > 4e4b084749c9e6e259817144be@%3Cdev.griffin.apache.org%3E
> > >
> > > The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc. can be
> found
> > > at:
> > >
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/0.
> > 2.0-incubating
> > >
> > > The tag to be voted upon is 0.2.0-incubating:
> > >
> > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-griffin.
> > > git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/griffin-0.2.0-incubating
> > >
> > > The release hash is :
> > >
> > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-griffin.
> > > git;a=commit;h=70419c4f4ec01dd70815d9480ab596b320fa5e2a
> > >
> > > The Nexus Staging URL:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> > > orgapachegriffin-1013
> > >
> > > Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
> > > 7F00C3BA90F3ECAEECB843A79BD6EC6C02379561
> > >
> > > KEYS file available:
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/KEYS
> > >
> > > For information about the contents of this release, see:
> > >
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/griffin/0.
> > > 2.0-incubating/CHANGES.txt
> > >
> > >
> > > Please download the release candidate and evaluate the necessary
> > items
> > > including checking hashes, signatures, build from source, run and test.
> > > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Griffin
> > > 0.2.0-incubating
> > > The vote will be open for 72 hours.
> > > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Griffin 0.2.0-incubating
> > > [ ] +0 no opinion
> > > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ...
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Lionel
> > > on behalf of Apache Griffin PPMC
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker 
>

[DISCUSS] Resolution to graduate Traffic Control to a top level project

[Dave Neuman]

Hello IPMC,
Per the graduation guidelines, the Traffic Control community would like to
start a DISCUSS thread on graduating to a top level project.  We have
discussed internally on private, taken a vote to draft a resolution [1],
and voted on the resolution [2].  The next step in the process is to submit
our resolution here for feedback.  Please take a moment to review our
resolution and let you know what feedback you have.

Thanks in advance,
Dave

[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/fb1fae0785feb6568cef6deb6fa20723eba54ed63a445462d44564d3@%3Cdev.trafficcontrol.apache.org%3E
[2]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/53c51f3eab45525c4e6c1bc52072659c751fd9c59001006791e4b0e3@%3Cdev.trafficcontrol.apache.org%3E


Resolution:

Establish the Apache Traffic Control Project

WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of
the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish
a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and maintenance
of open-source software, for distribution at no charge to the public,
related to building, monitoring, configuring, and provisioning a large
scale content delivery network (CDN)..

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
(PMC), to be known as the "Apache Traffic Control Project", be and
hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it
further

RESOLVED, that the Apache Traffic Control Project be and hereby is
responsible for the creation and maintenance of software related to
building, monitoring, configuring, and provisioning a large scale
content delivery network (CDN).; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Traffic Control" be
and hereby is created, the person holding such office to serve at the
direction of the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache Traffic
Control Project, and to have primary responsibility for management of
the projects within the scope of responsibility of the Apache Traffic
Control Project; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache Traffic Control
Project:

 * Dan Kirkwood   
 * David Neuman   
 * Dewayne Richardson 
 * Eric Covener   
 * Eric Friedrich 
 * Hank Beatty
 * Jan van Doorn  
 * Jeff Elsloo
 * Jeremy Mitchell
 * Leif Hedstrom  
 * Mark Torluemke 
 * Phil Sorber
 * Steve Malenfant

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that David Neuman be appointed
to the office of Vice President, Apache Traffic Control, to serve in
accordance with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors
and the Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement,
removal or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be
it further

RESOLVED, that the initial Apache Traffic Control PMC be and hereby is
tasked with the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open
development and increased participation in the Apache Traffic Control
Project; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Apache Traffic Control Project be and hereby is
tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator
Traffic Control podling; and be it further

RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
Traffic Control podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are
hereafter discharged.

Re: Milagro Rescue Roadmap

[John D. Ament]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:35 AM Nick Kew  wrote:

> Posting to both dev@milagro and general@incubator.
> As champion for Milagro, I feel responsible for this.
>
> In retrospect, Milagro probably entered the incubator
> prematurely.  It has got hung up on issues of process
> and infrastructure, and project activity hasn't
> migrated to apache.
>
> John has, for very good reasons, proposed retirement.
> However, a poll on the subject attracted a crop of -1 votes:
> people don't want it to retire.
>
> I added a mentor note to April's (late) report:
>
>   "Retirement vote got a crop of NOs, though some of those may
>have misunderstood its purpose.  I'm proposing those who
>support continuation make concrete progress in time to report
>(on time) in May.  Failing that, I will support retirement."
>
> I think what we need right now is a roadmap to bring work
> to Apache.  That'll need the Milagro community to identify
> what's holding it back, and us all to determine whether it
> makes sense to resolve at apache or retire it to its
> prior home at github.
>

Agreed.  There are two big red flags that I see right now that are blocking
Milagro.

- Commits being proposed to their master repos that explicitly reference
repositories hosted by Miracl.
- A seemingly lack of project direction.  Some NTT folks seem willing to
work with the project, but are waiting on Miracl to do something.

The first item is a clear problem.  To be an Apache project, you need to be
vendor independent.  You can't mix the company you work for an Apache, just
don't mix.  It's not clear to me yet that the participants on the project
want that.  Though that could easily be explained by joining Apache too
early.  I suspect there are some other podlings in similar boats, but are
masked by just enough on list discussions.


>
> Would folks be happy for me to set up a page for this purpose
> under wiki/incubator?  I would propose a skeleton (mainly a
> set of headings) and look to the community to flesh it out.
>

If Milagro already has a cwiki instance, I think it can live there.


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Omid 0.9.0.0 (incubating)

[Alan Gates]

Forwarding my +1 from the dev list.

Alan.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:52 AM, Matt Sicker  wrote:

> * Signatures ok
> * Disclaimer, license, notice ok
> * Rat check ok
>
> I am, however, getting a test failure:
>
> Failed tests:
>
> TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.testSuccessOfTSOClientReconnec
> tionsToARestartedTSOWithZKPublishing:214
> » Execution
>   TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.testSuccessfulConnectionToTSOThroughZK:176
> »
> Execution
>
> More details:
>
> Tests run: 4, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 8.343 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO
> testSuccessOfTSOClientReconnectionsToARestartedTSOWithZKPubl
> ishing(org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO)
> Time elapsed: 1.738 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: java.net.NoRouteToHostException:
> No route to host
> at
> org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.
> testSuccessOfTSOClientReconnectionsToARestartedTSOWithZKPublishing(
> TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.java:214)
> Caused by: java.net.NoRouteToHostException: No route to host
>
> testSuccessfulConnectionToTSOThroughZK(org.apache.omid.tso.client.
> TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO)
> Time elapsed: 1.247 sec  <<< FAILURE!
> java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: java.net.NoRouteToHostException:
> No route to host
> at
> org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.
> testSuccessfulConnectionToTSOThroughZK(TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.
> java:176)
> Caused by: java.net.NoRouteToHostException: No route to host
>
>
> On 12 April 2018 at 05:54, Ohad Shacham  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > The Apache Omid community has voted on and approved a proposal
> > to release Apache Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating.
> >
> > PPMC Vote Call:http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-
> > omid-dev/201804.mbox/%3cCAHuxFyN_uzAb12=AS-WyVXiwn1KTwmk2SY4=
> > b1f6zktwebu...@mail.gmail.com%3e
> >
> >
> > PPMC Vote Result:
> >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-omid-
> dev/201804.mbox/%
> > 3cCAChRgeEQg7E-V6abZaWLaxiEdmULTtcmS_w=4v2d7oye0yf...@mail.gmail.com%3e
> >
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-omid-
> dev/201804.mbox/%
> > 3cCAAF1JdhkMXvObfMD6xV=RPXhk9fg27fHR-kR6tAt=w1dweo...@mail.gmail.com%3e
> >
> >
> > PPMC Vote Summary:
> > 4 binding (IPMC member) +1 votes
> > 0 non-binding PPMC member +1 votes
> > No -1 votes
> >
> > Release notes for the 0.9.0.0
> > release:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/
> > omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> >
> >
> > Git tag for the release:
> >
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-omid.git/?
> > p=incubator-omid.git;a=tag;h=264a30e825bd0a75c435888d3cc12a35b19b4405
> >
> >
> > Sources for the release:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.
> > 0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz
> >
> >
> > Source release verification: PGP Signature:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.
> > 0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz.asc
> >
> >
> > SHA512 Hash:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.
> > 0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz.sha512
> >
> >
> > Keys to verify the signature of the release artifact are available at:
> >
> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/KEYS
> >
> >
> > We request the permission of IPMC to publish the above release candidate
> as
> > Apache Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating. Please try out the package and vote. The
> > vote is open for a minimum of 72 hours or until the necessary number of
> > votes (3 binding +1s) is reached. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache
> > Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating [ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm
> okay
> > with the release [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... Please add
> > (binding) if your vote is binding.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ohad
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker 
>

RE: The role of a mentor

[ross]

I agree with the observations and clarifications to my post.

I should perhaps have prefaced my opinion with "If I agree to mentor I assume I 
will [read everything] for the first x months and then monitor for problems 
after that"

This is why I've not mentored a project for some time. It *is* very time 
consuming if we are to do it right, especially at the start.

Ross

-Original Message-
From: Ted Dunning  
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 9:56 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: The role of a mentor

I try to be more aware early on and then ease up later after things start 
moving smoothly.

I still watch a lot, however.



On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 9:47 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz < 
bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:07 AM, Hen  wrote:
> > ...If you
> > think of someone you view as a mentor, they didn't spend all their 
> > time looking over your shoulder. Instead you met with them from time 
> > to time
> and
> > discussed a topic that you were looking to find clarity on...
>
> That's how I see my role as a mentor - I try to become aware of where 
> help is needed, but generally don't follow everything.
>
> For this I like the [mentors] subject line tag that some podlings use 
> to raise the mentors attention on their dev list.
>
> -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: Milagro Rescue Roadmap

[Ted Dunning]

I think a key task here is to help people understand that retirement does
not me and that the community dies. What means in many respects is the
community's freed of the Apache process.

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, 09:16 Bertrand Delacretaz 
wrote:

> Hi Nick,
>
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Nick Kew  wrote:
> > ...I think what we need right now is a roadmap to bring work
> > to Apache.  That'll need the Milagro community to identify
> > what's holding it back, and us all to determine whether it
> > makes sense to resolve at apache or retire it to its
> > prior home at github
>
> Definitely a job for the Milagro community - if people want to stay in
> the Incubator, they have to roll up their sleeves accordingly - with
> the support of their mentors, of course.
>
> > ...Would folks be happy for me to set up a page for this purpose
> > under wiki/incubator?...
>
> Sounds good to me, that might be useful for other similar situations.
>
> -Bertrand
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Omid 0.9.0.0 (incubating)

[Matt Sicker]

* Signatures ok
* Disclaimer, license, notice ok
* Rat check ok

I am, however, getting a test failure:

Failed tests:

TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.testSuccessOfTSOClientReconnectionsToARestartedTSOWithZKPublishing:214
» Execution
  TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.testSuccessfulConnectionToTSOThroughZK:176 »
Execution

More details:

Tests run: 4, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 8.343 sec
<<< FAILURE! - in org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO
testSuccessOfTSOClientReconnectionsToARestartedTSOWithZKPublishing(org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO)
Time elapsed: 1.738 sec  <<< FAILURE!
java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: java.net.NoRouteToHostException:
No route to host
at
org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.testSuccessOfTSOClientReconnectionsToARestartedTSOWithZKPublishing(TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.java:214)
Caused by: java.net.NoRouteToHostException: No route to host

testSuccessfulConnectionToTSOThroughZK(org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO)
Time elapsed: 1.247 sec  <<< FAILURE!
java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: java.net.NoRouteToHostException:
No route to host
at
org.apache.omid.tso.client.TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.testSuccessfulConnectionToTSOThroughZK(TestTSOClientConnectionToTSO.java:176)
Caused by: java.net.NoRouteToHostException: No route to host


On 12 April 2018 at 05:54, Ohad Shacham  wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> The Apache Omid community has voted on and approved a proposal
> to release Apache Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating.
>
> PPMC Vote Call:http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-
> omid-dev/201804.mbox/%3cCAHuxFyN_uzAb12=AS-WyVXiwn1KTwmk2SY4=
> b1f6zktwebu...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
>
> PPMC Vote Result:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-omid-dev/201804.mbox/%
> 3cCAChRgeEQg7E-V6abZaWLaxiEdmULTtcmS_w=4v2d7oye0yf...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-omid-dev/201804.mbox/%
> 3cCAAF1JdhkMXvObfMD6xV=RPXhk9fg27fHR-kR6tAt=w1dweo...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
>
> PPMC Vote Summary:
> 4 binding (IPMC member) +1 votes
> 0 non-binding PPMC member +1 votes
> No -1 votes
>
> Release notes for the 0.9.0.0
> release:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/
> omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html
>
>
> Git tag for the release:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-omid.git/?
> p=incubator-omid.git;a=tag;h=264a30e825bd0a75c435888d3cc12a35b19b4405
>
>
> Sources for the release:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.
> 0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz
>
>
> Source release verification: PGP Signature:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.
> 0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz.asc
>
>
> SHA512 Hash:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.
> 0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz.sha512
>
>
> Keys to verify the signature of the release artifact are available at:
>
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/KEYS
>
>
> We request the permission of IPMC to publish the above release candidate as
> Apache Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating. Please try out the package and vote. The
> vote is open for a minimum of 72 hours or until the necessary number of
> votes (3 binding +1s) is reached. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache
> Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating [ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay
> with the release [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... Please add
> (binding) if your vote is binding.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ohad
>



-- 
Matt Sicker 

Re: Milagro Rescue Roadmap

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

Hi Nick,

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Nick Kew  wrote:
> ...I think what we need right now is a roadmap to bring work
> to Apache.  That'll need the Milagro community to identify
> what's holding it back, and us all to determine whether it
> makes sense to resolve at apache or retire it to its
> prior home at github

Definitely a job for the Milagro community - if people want to stay in
the Incubator, they have to roll up their sleeves accordingly - with
the support of their mentors, of course.

> ...Would folks be happy for me to set up a page for this purpose
> under wiki/incubator?...

Sounds good to me, that might be useful for other similar situations.

-Bertrand

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

Milagro Rescue Roadmap

[Nick Kew]

Posting to both dev@milagro and general@incubator.
As champion for Milagro, I feel responsible for this.

In retrospect, Milagro probably entered the incubator
prematurely.  It has got hung up on issues of process
and infrastructure, and project activity hasn't
migrated to apache.

John has, for very good reasons, proposed retirement.
However, a poll on the subject attracted a crop of -1 votes:
people don't want it to retire.

I added a mentor note to April's (late) report:

  "Retirement vote got a crop of NOs, though some of those may
   have misunderstood its purpose.  I'm proposing those who
   support continuation make concrete progress in time to report
   (on time) in May.  Failing that, I will support retirement."

I think what we need right now is a roadmap to bring work
to Apache.  That'll need the Milagro community to identify
what's holding it back, and us all to determine whether it
makes sense to resolve at apache or retire it to its
prior home at github.

Would folks be happy for me to set up a page for this purpose
under wiki/incubator?  I would propose a skeleton (mainly a
set of headings) and look to the community to flesh it out.

-- 
Nick Kew

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

[VOTE] Release Apache Omid 0.9.0.0 (incubating)

[Ohad Shacham]

Hi,


The Apache Omid community has voted on and approved a proposal
to release Apache Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating.

PPMC Vote 
Call:http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-omid-dev/201804.mbox/%3cCAHuxFyN_uzAb12=AS-WyVXiwn1KTwmk2SY4=b1f6zktwebu...@mail.gmail.com%3e


PPMC Vote Result:

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-omid-dev/201804.mbox/%3cCAChRgeEQg7E-V6abZaWLaxiEdmULTtcmS_w=4v2d7oye0yf...@mail.gmail.com%3e

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-omid-dev/201804.mbox/%3cCAAF1JdhkMXvObfMD6xV=RPXhk9fg27fHR-kR6tAt=w1dweo...@mail.gmail.com%3e


PPMC Vote Summary:
4 binding (IPMC member) +1 votes
0 non-binding PPMC member +1 votes
No -1 votes

Release notes for the 0.9.0.0
release:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/RELEASE_NOTES.html


Git tag for the release:

https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-omid.git/?p=incubator-omid.git;a=tag;h=264a30e825bd0a75c435888d3cc12a35b19b4405


Sources for the release:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz


Source release verification: PGP Signature:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz.asc


SHA512 Hash:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/apache-omid-incubating-0.9.0.0-src.tar.gz.sha512


Keys to verify the signature of the release artifact are available at:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/omid/0.9.0.0-rc2/KEYS


We request the permission of IPMC to publish the above release candidate as
Apache Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating. Please try out the package and vote. The
vote is open for a minimum of 72 hours or until the necessary number of
votes (3 binding +1s) is reached. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache
Omid 0.9.0.0-incubating [ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay
with the release [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... Please add
(binding) if your vote is binding.


Thanks,
Ohad