JBO,
I agree with your curiosity, but maybe we should take it to another thread.
Comparison to Kafka or Pulsar or ... doesn't really affect the question of
incubation.
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 5:41 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As soon as we have communities, there's no problem.
>
Hi,
As soon as we have communities, there's no problem.
I think it would just be interesting to have some details about why
TubeMQ brings something different compare to existing MQ projects
(Kafka, Pulsar, ActiveMQ, etc).
The purpose is not to challenge projects each other but have better
Hi, this is an interesting proposal.
I think the competition among different MQ is not an issue for incubator
stage. Users and developers will have their own choices.
I guess that your challenges during the incubation:
expanding diversity (now committers come from one company),
and dealing with
+1 （binding)
I checked the staged source and binary bundles.
- Hashes file and signature files are OK
- DISCLAIMER file is there
- LICENSE and NOTICE files are fine
Willem Jiang
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 8:34 PM 申远 wrote:
>
> Hi, folks
>
> The Apache Weex
Hi -
> On Oct 21, 2019, at 7:26 PM, 俊平堵 wrote:
>
> bq. You might be right about that the project currently I believe there's
> only one mentor with recent mentoring experience, and while all proposed are
> ASF members, not all of them are active on the IPMC general list. It might
> be better
Agree. Just like we have different SQL engines in Apache (Hive, Impala,
SparkSQL, Hawq, etc.) - most of them are competitive but have different
design trade-offs and have successful user/developer community. It
shouldn't be a concern for project incubator stage.
Thanks,
Junping
Sheng Wu
bq. You might be right about that the project currently I believe there's
only one mentor with recent mentoring experience, and while all proposed are
ASF members, not all of them are active on the IPMC general list. It might
be better for the project to have at least one other mentor with
Hi, Dave
> Consider adding exclusions for the two sets of files that are in the
> LICENSE file and shown as on-standard in the Rat check output.
This is something I want to fix long time ago, but I didn't find any
documentation about how to add exclusion for RAT.
FYI: I always execute RAT
Apache Pulsar is doing well and it is competing with Apache Kafka.
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 21, 2019, at 3:10 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> Kafka is one of the most well known Apache projects right now; I don’t
> think that’s a fair comparison.
>
>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at
Kafka is one of the most well known Apache projects right now; I don’t
think that’s a fair comparison.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 10:07, Sheng Wu wrote:
> Hi
>
> I don't see the competition among different MQ solutions is an issue. This
> happens among all OSS projects, inside or outside ASF.
> We
Thanks Dave, The Release notes file is something we had added earlier before we
started the incubation. We had looked at other incubating projects
(incubator-gobblin, incubator-heron, ...) and it did not look like a standard
mandated. Hence, we went ahead and removed as we have the current
> On Oct 21, 2019, at 2:16 PM, Balaji Varadarajan wrote:
>
> Thanks Dave. I have addressed your comments related to Confluent packages and
> release notes in master with this PR :
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/965
>
> Balaji.V
>
> On 2019/10/21 19:33:03, Dave Fisher
Thanks Dave. I have addressed your comments related to Confluent packages and
release notes in master with this PR :
https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/965
Balaji.V
On 2019/10/21 19:33:03, Dave Fisher wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Incubating in name
> Signature and Checksums
+1 looks good to me
Am Mo., 21. Okt. 2019 um 21:52 Uhr schrieb Dave Fisher :
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Incubating in name
> Signature and Checksum are correct
> LICENSE is good
> NOTICE is good
> DISCLAIMER is good
> Rat check passes. Consider adding exclusions for the two sets of files that
> are in
+1 (binding)
Incubating in name
Signature and Checksum are correct
LICENSE is good
NOTICE is good
DISCLAIMER is good
Rat check passes. Consider adding exclusions for the two sets of files that are
in the LICENSE file and shown as on-standard in the Rat check output.
Build did fail when it got
+1 (binding)
Incubating in name
Signature and Checksums Validated
DISCLAIMER-WIP is present
LICENSE is good
NOTICE is good
RatCheck confirms proper License Headers
`mvn clean install` inferred as build from pom.xml
This ought to be in the README.md since it runs for a very long time
and
Regarding licenses, dplyr is under MIT, see:
https://github.com/tidyverse/dplyr/blob/master/LICENSE.md. However, other
packages are under GPL2.
Here are all the packages that sparklyr currently depends on and their
associated license (This was retrieved from
https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=,
+1 (binding)
(forward from dev@)
On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 3:04 PM wrote:
> Dear IPMC,
>
> Apache Hudi (incubating) (pronounced Hoodie) stands for Hadoop Upserts anD
> Incrementals. Apache Hudi (incubating) manages storage of large analytical
> datasets on DFS (Cloud stores, HDFS or any Hadoop
This looks interesting to me.
I would be willing to contribute, if you would like to add me to the
initial list of committers.
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 10:50 AM Matt Sicker wrote:
> A lot of core R libraries seem to be under GPL. If we build more R
> projects at Apache, it seems like we may
Hi
I think you just used the wrong word. (Not LAZY vote)
I think you mean, you already have 3 +1 IPMC votes, so the vote could pass
without a new vote.
But in this release case. Other IPMC could find some new issues, and the +1
you got could be changed to -1.
Sheng Wu 吴晟
Apache SkyWalking
Hi,
So do I need open a new vote? Or just vote on this thread?
Best,
Justin Mclean 于2019年10月21日 周一下午4:45写道：
> Hi,
>
> Release votes can’t be lazy, all release must be approved by the IPMC to
> be an offical release.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
Hi
I don't see the competition among different MQ solutions is an issue. This
happens among all OSS projects, inside or outside ASF.
We are using the Apache Way to help the project to build the community.
If(only if) it is not better than Kafka in all fields(an assumption only),
it will/could end
A lot of core R libraries seem to be under GPL. If we build more R
projects at Apache, it seems like we may need more Apache-licensed (or
compatible) libraries in R.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 at 03:12, Justin Mclean wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I also concerned that the initial committer list only contains 3
Hi,
Release votes can’t be lazy, all release must be approved by the IPMC to be an
offical release.
Thanks,
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
+1 (binding).
Carrying my vote here.
Willem Jiang
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 1:47 PM Xiangdong Huang wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> This is a call for vote to release Apache IoTDB (Incubating) version 0.8.1,
> which is a bug-fix Release of 0.8.0 for the IoTDB
Hi,
It might help to use the subject like [VOTE] rather than [Vote] as I completely
missed this.
Thanks,
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
Hi,
> The first one is if we are able to mentor the project well enough (old
> discussion).
You might be right about that the project currently I believe there's only one
mentor with recent mentoring experience, and while all proposed are ASF
members, not all of them are active on the IPMC
Hi, community
I understood this is a very busy mailing list, and it's a little disturbing
to resend the same email as before. But I'm really appreciated if it's
possible for individuals from IPMC to vote on this thread.
*FYI: As we remove the bundling of JSC, the build speed of Weex Release
will
Hi,
Just a lazy vote is fine with me.
Thanks,
Justin
On Mon, 21 Oct 2019, 14:03 Julian Feinauer,
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> as already discussed before the Podling Edgent is “too dead” to be revived.
> The PPMC has thus voted to leave the incubator [1,2] and we will move the
> project to GitHub,
Hi all,
as already discussed before the Podling Edgent is “too dead” to be revived.
The PPMC has thus voted to leave the incubator [1,2] and we will move the
project to GitHub, perhaps some interest will stay.
What are the next (formal) steps. Do we hold a Vote for the IPMC?
Thanks!
Julian
Hi David,
Very interesting proposal.
How do you compare with Apache Kafka or Pulsar ?
It sounds to address the same use cases, right ?
I would be interested to be mentor on the proposal if you are looking
for an additional one.
Regards
JB
On 21/10/2019 11:54, David Nalley wrote:
> Greetings
Hi David,
thanks for the nice proposal.
I think it was already introduced a bit at the ApacheCon NA so it may already
be known a bit to some folks.
The proposal reads quite nice and TubeMQ seems to be a really nice project and
has some impressive capabilities and USPs.
Although, those who know
Greetings folks:
Please consider the following proposal, which is also on the wiki[1].
I look forward to hearing feedback.
TubeMQ
=Abstract=
TubeMQ is a distributed messaging queue (MQ) system developed by
Tencent Big Data since 2013. It focuses on high-performance storage
and transmission of
Hi,
72 hours passed, no -1 vote.
According to the lazy consensus rules, The vote [1] passed successfully.
Best Regards
Eric
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e7e13899ff2ac177cd5142612c75e2fa8361ad2
a0ee74293cf1525cb@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
Hi,
I also concerned that the initial committer list only contains 3 committers.
Why have you not included others in the community that have made contributions?
I don’t know if this is an issue or not but bring it up just in case you not
aware. I can see that some of the tidyverse packages are
Hi,
> Can brpc be put into this group, together with Echarts/doris.
> So I can reminder them and me to finish the pod report at the same time.
If a project wants to change group in reports in the request needs to come from
the PMC. IMO it’s probably not a good idea to have all three projects
36 matches
Mail list logo
