DB JDO new project

project JDO 19 Nov 2004, Craig Russell (craig dot russell at sun dot com) (updated 23 Nov 2004) (0) rationale Java Data Objects (JDO) is being proposed as a sub-project within the DB top-level project. JDO is an interface-based domain-object-to-database programming model developed as a standard

Re: DB JDO new project

can do with the code. Regards, Craig On Dec 7, 2004, at 9:19 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Wednesday 08 December 2004 00:47, Craig Russell wrote: The DB project voted to adopt JDO last week-end, and they suggested I contact you to set up the resources for the project. Very interesting :o) Btw, what

Re: Apache JDO Resources

-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: Please check/post your PROJECT RESOURCE REQUESTS

. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S

Re: Please check/post your PROJECT RESOURCE REQUESTS

Cool! On Jan 4, 2005, at 6:13 PM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: On Jan 4, 2005, at 9:07 PM, Craig Russell wrote: Hi Noel, Geir, So the JDO mailing lists are done and the JIRA has been set up. What's left for JDO I think are a Wiki and an svn repository. After the repository is done we will need

Re: [STATUS] (incubator) Thu 27 Jan 2005 12:22:31 AM EST

76 80) # End: # - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL

Re: Apache JDO

Hi Noel, On May 29, 2005, at 1:26 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: Craig Russell wrote: Google Apache JDO and you get a hit for Apache OJB. You would never guess that we're building the API and TCK for JDO 2.0 here. Apache JDO has a sponsor, committers, a repository, a JIRA, and wiki pages

Quarterly status report: Incubating Apache JDO

API sub-project has been synchronized with the latest version of the specification. The TCK sub-project is about 80% complete. Still lacks full testing for O/R mapping and detached objects.The Apache JDO web site is now active at http://incubator.apache.org/jdoCraig Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java

Re: JDO2 Snapshots

] -To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp

Re: JDO2 Snapshots

Hi,Thanks for the useful feedback.The dotted notation is news to me but makes a lot of sense. I'll study the reading materials and ask questions if it's too hard to suss out.On Aug 5, 2005, at 6:03 PM, Brett Porter wrote:On 8/6/05, Craig Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It'd be great if you can

Re: JDO2 Snapshots

wrote:On 8/6/05, Craig Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It'd be great if you can put them up at cvs.apache.org, maybe under agroup of org.apache.incubator.jdo? I don't understand what this means. I don't know how, or don't haveprivileges to, publish anything except via svn. Sorry, when

Re: JDO2 Snapshots

Hi Brett,On Aug 6, 2005, at 7:27 PM, Brett Porter wrote:On 8/7/05, Craig Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Brett,I looked at ibiblio and found some "official-looking" jars checked in. Itseems that we might use javax.jdo as the group name for the jdo2.jar (thisis the official API

Re: [VOTE] Accept Juneau into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Craig > On Jun 21, 2016, at 10:10 AM, James Bognar > wrote: > > Hi all, > > It looks like the discussion thread has died down so I am now calling a > vote on accepting Juneau into the Apache Incubator. > > For those who are interested the DISCUSS

Re: [DISCUSS] Juneau Incubation Proposal

Sounds interesting. Sign me up to mentor. Craig > On Jun 16, 2016, at 9:52 AM, James Bognar wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'd like to propose Juneau to be an Apache Incubator project. > > Juneau is a toolkit for marshalling POJOs to a wide variety of content > types

Re: Release dependant on LGPL

I agree that an incubating release does not need to be fully compliant with the proscription against mandatory LGPL dependencies for Apache releases. Clearly the podling is well aware of the need to replace the LGPL dependency before graduation. And I agree with Greg that a podling learning the

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Johnzon from the Incubator

+1 for graduation (binding) I don’t see any value in keeping Johnzon in incubation. The project seems to be ticking along, with several releases, frequent commits, and a low excitement but active community. Craig > On Apr 1, 2016, at 12:49 PM, Hendrik Dev wrote: > >

Re: Policy should be simple (was "Allowed Champions on podlings")

> On Mar 22, 2016, at 11:25 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:19 PM Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com> > wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Craig Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com> >>

Re: Allowed Champions on podlings

There is a sorta technical reason for the Champion to be a member of the PMC of the sponsor. I’d expect the Champion to subscribe to the private@ list and to have binding votes on podling releases. These both require PMC membership. The alternative is to create two different “exceptions” that

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Brooklyn - CLI

A software grant can only grant rights that are owned by the grantor. If there was a(n innocent) mistake in the file referenced by the grant, no big deal IMHO. Clearly, bundled dependencies cannot be included in a grant since the grantor has no rights to them. The fact that they were included

Re: LICENSE info for ALv2, not ASF

As I understand it, LICENSE is for licenses. Period. If advertising is required, the NOTICE file is used. If there are third party works included in a distribution that use the same Apache 2.0 license as any Apache components, the license file already contains the appropriate license. Section

Re: LICENSE info for ALv2, not ASF

> On Mar 7, 2016, at 1:43 PM, Steve Varnau <steve.var...@esgyn.com> wrote: > >> From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] >> Sent: Monday, March 7, 2016 1:09 PM >> To: general@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: LICENSE info for ALv2, not ASF >&g

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

I found Jim’s message from February 24 in which he says that for one release, he’s ok with having the LGPL dependency. Given that substantial progress has been made and continues to be made on getting the dependency relicensed, I expect that asking for permission for another release in the

Re: [VOTE] Fluo Parent POM 1-incubating (rc2)

> On Aug 3, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Christopher wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:14 AM Vice President, Brand Management < > vp-br...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> In particular, using another third party's potential branding mis-use to >> justify your desired uses of an Apache

Re: [Incubator Wiki] Update of "August2016" by Franck Cuny

;> - >> - None. >> - >> - How has the community developed since the last report? >> - >> - We have gained a new contributor, and have continued developing and >> - updating the web page to increase interest. We have not made >> - any real

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Apache Gearpump (incubating) 0.8.1-RC3

Hi John, Given the state of Apache documented processes, I think it was perfectly fine to close this vote with a RESULT. I was not confused after reading >>> We will correct the noted problems and submit a 0.8.1-RC4. Recognizing that this document is (still!) in draft status

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Apache Gearpump (incubating) 0.8.1-RC3

any VOTE has a RESULT: passed, failed, or canceled. Let the arrows fly! And the comdev pages could also be similarly improved, for anyone who has an interest. Craig > John > > >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 8:12 AM, Craig Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com> >

Re: Question regarding incubator status page

I also got confused by this part of the podling status page. Perhaps we can fix this by changing the wording: >> > members> >> If the project website and code repository are not yet set up, use the >> following table: I’m not sure about the utility of verifying the current state of the podling.

Re: [VOTE] Fluo Parent POM 1-incubating (rc2)

> On Aug 1, 2016, at 2:22 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 4:21 PM Christopher wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 3:50 PM John D. Ament >> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 10:29 AM Keith Turner

Re: [VOTE] Fluo Parent POM 1-incubating (rc2)

Hi Christopher, > On Aug 1, 2016, at 3:00 PM, Christopher wrote: > > Why would this be a concern for http://fluo.io, but not sites like > http://www.stratahadoopworld.com/ or http://accumulosummit.com/ which are > related to the ASF project, but clearly not owned or

Re: [RESULT] MXNet to enter the Incubator

Hi Hen, To make it easier for secretary to request new accounts, can you post the proposal to https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ProjectProposals Thanks, Craig > On Jan 23, 2017, at 9:19 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: > > Vote is closed and successful. > > 7 binding +1 votes. >

Re: Adding committers to a PPMC

Hi Hen, At the bottom of the PPMC list is a big bold “+”. If you click on that, you can add apache ids to the PPMC. HTH, Craig > On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:36 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > > When I look at https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/ppmc/mxnet - I only see the > mentors

Re: [VOTE] Gobblin to enter Apache Incubator

Excellent proposal. +1 (binding) Craig > On Feb 16, 2017, at 9:33 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > > Hello Everyone, > I would like to call a vote for accepting "Gobblin" for incubation in the > Apache Incubator. > The full proposal is available below, and is also available in the

Re: [VOTE] Gobblin to enter Apache Incubator

Hi Olivier, Can you also post the link to this proposal on https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ProjectProposals ? Thanks, Craig > On Feb 16, 2017, at 9:33 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > > Hello Everyone, > I would like to call a vote for accepting "Gobblin" for incubation in the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Juneau 6.1.0-incubating-RC2

> On Feb 23, 2017, at 6:23 AM, James Bognar wrote: > > Thanks Stian, > > Bugs opened for the NOTICE file, port conflict issue, and failing > testcase. I thought we shook out all the timezone-related testcase > failures on the last release, but I'll revisit. > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Juneau 6.1.0-incubating-RC2

+1 Craig > On Feb 22, 2017, at 9:05 AM, James Bognar wrote: > > The Apache Juneau Incubator PPMC has voted *+3* to release Apache Juneau > 6.1.0-incubating RC2. > > > This vote carries over *+2* binding votes from IPMC mentors: > > Steve Blackmon: +1 > > John D

Re: Donating freemarker-online as part of the FreeMarker project, how?

Hi, Sounds like the easiest way to handle this is as you described. Get a CCLA from Kenshoo with https://github.com/kenshoo/freemarker-online describing the code being contributed Add any current Kenshoo employees Get an ICLA from non-Kenshoo folks Create a git repo for the new content After

Re: Donating freemarker-online as part of the FreeMarker project, how?

Hi Daniel, > On Feb 22, 2017, at 9:24 PM, Daniel Dekany <ddek...@freemail.hu> wrote: > > Wednesday, February 22, 2017, 8:12:32 PM, Craig Russell wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Sounds like the easiest way to handle this is as you described. > > If we can do

Re: Ease of release process and exit criteria

In the JDO project, we have detailed build/release instructions, yet after several years, every time we put out a release, there is something different. I think it’s the nature of software, not only because the project changes ever so slightly but the dependencies also change underneath you. So

Re: SGA or ICLA?

Hi Taylor, My advice is to simply get ICLAs for all past, present, and future contributors to the project. That will cover Apache’s requirements. If you have people who for whatever reason won’t sign the ICLA, perhaps you can bring their concerns back here. Regards, Criag > On Sep 14, 2016,

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Hi Geertjan, You have already noticed that at Apache we don’t all speak with one voice. Even those who have literally been here for years may appear to disagree on the details, while I expect most agree on the broad strokes. Kudos for taking all the advice and proposing a plan to move this

Re: [VOTE] Accept NetBeans into the Apache Incubator

> On Sep 27, 2016, at 1:30 PM, Ate Douma wrote: > > This vote will run for at least 72 hours. Please VOTE as follows > [X] +1 Accept NetBeans into the Apache Incubator > [] +0 Abstain. > [] -1 Do not accept NetBeans into the Apache Incubator because ... Craig L Russell

Re: Traffic Control Incubator Code Grant next steps

Hi Phil, > On Oct 5, 2016, at 9:51 AM, Phil Sorber wrote: > > So we now have CCLA's on file from all contributing corps as well as ICLA's > from all individual contributors. Have we satisfied the requirements to make > a release from the incubator or are there still

Re: [VOTE] Apache Beam release 0.3.0-incubating

> On Oct 29, 2016, at 1:54 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 4:51 PM Justin Mclean > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >>> -1 due to the kinesis library issue. >> >> Can you provide a bit more detail on what the objection is with the >>

RocketMQ link on https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ProjectProposals

Is it me or is this link broken? Thanks, Craig Craig L Russell Secretary, Apache Software Foundation c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional

Re: [VOTE][RESULT] Accept OpenWhisk into the Apache Incubator

I’m unable to find the proposal at https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ProjectProposals Is it me or is the proposal not included on that page? Thanks, Craig > On Nov 23, 2016, at 12:20 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > This vote passes with 10 binding +1's, 3 non-binding +1, and

Re: [VOTE] Apache Beam release 0.3.0-incubating

is over there. Even better, there is already a JIRA for what appears to be relevant to this issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-198# Folks on legal-discuss can tune into that discussion, and may not be looking at the Beam vote thread. Craig > > On Oct 30, 2016 10:50, "Cr

Re: Release License Audit

Hi Eric, > On Nov 1, 2016, at 9:30 AM, Eric Friedrich wrote: > > Many of the release guidelines mention a license audit of the released > source files. > > Are there any particular requirements as to how this audit is performed? No. The requirement is that all files be

Re: [VOTE] Apache Beam release 0.3.0-incubating

> On Oct 30, 2016, at 6:03 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 10:53 PM Craig Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com> > wrote: > >> >>> On Oct 29, 2016, at 1:54 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> &g

Re: NetBeans next steps

I could not find Julien Enselme as an initial committer on the NetBeans proposal. Craig > On Oct 14, 2016, at 5:10 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > wrote: > > Hi, > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Julien Enselme wrote: >> ...From what I understand

Re: SGA vs CCLA

Hi Niclas, > On Nov 29, 2016, at 8:04 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > I am seeing on > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#initial-import-code-dump > that the CCLA is adequate for new codebases coming in via the Incubator. Is > that really the case? It seems to me

Re: SGA vs CCLA

Hi Niclas, The CCLA is sufficient as a code grant for new code bases coming into Apache. Of course, committers must submit their own ICLA as well. Why do you consider the CCLA a ‘weak’ agreement? Craig > On Nov 29, 2016, at 8:04 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > I am seeing

Re: [DISCUSS] Significance of Artifact Names

9ec39fa78c31b39c83a6fea29eb34fada0ee070413@1222432864@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E > [4]: > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html#best-practice-maven > [5]: http://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution.html#channels Craig Russell papa...@gmail.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Juneau 6.0.1-incubating-RC3

> On Dec 29, 2016, at 6:30 PM, James Bognar wrote: > > Yea...that's my cat. > > I thought I did sign it with an Apache email address. I'll recheck that. It should be possible for you to add your apache email address to your key. And then re-up-load the key with

Re: Slack

Hi James, There was a pretty extensive discussion on the netbeans dev list. I’d encourage you to review this thread https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2dce365d03334c82d31b12c8b3dcad1a925a2f71af75658b8d8a5a07@%3Cdev.netbeans.apache.org%3E You can get all of the messages in the thread by doing

Re: [VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

+1 looks like a good solution to a sticky problem. Craig > On Mar 11, 2017, at 9:31 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > Log4cxx was originally a sub-project of the Logging Services. In 2013 several > users became frustrated that they were submitting patches but there were

Re: Incubator wiki karma needed

Hi Ed, What Nick said. If you're still having trouble resetting your password at id.apache.org, the reset information is sent to your email address eesp...@gmail.com Regards, Craig > On Mar 31, 2017, at 2:21 AM, Nick Burch wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017, Ed Espino

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Juneau 6.3.1-incubating-RC1

+1 to release. Craig checked NOTICE, LICENSE checked .asc and .md5 sigs and checksums built from top level with no errors > On Jul 31, 2017, at 10:33 AM, Suneel Marthi wrote: > > +1 binding > > 1. checked NOTICE, License > 2. Verified sigs and hashes > > > On Mon, Jul

Help modifying incubator web site

Hi, I've got some updates for the ip-clearance page and I'd like to publish them. I started by fixing https://github.com/apache/incubator/blob/master/pages/guides/ip_clearance.ad where the metadata is rendered as text. But git gives me an error. How do I fix this? Thanks, Craig clr% git

Re: Help modifying incubator web site

ular ASF credentials. Give it a shot, and > provide feedback of course :-) > > John > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 7:24 PM Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I've got some updates for the ip-clearance page and I'd like to publish >&g

Re: HORN retirement question

Hi, > On Jul 14, 2017, at 3:28 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > All, > > For podlings so far, its been easy to decide how to retire them. They've > had releases and/or naming completed so we keep the source code around. > > HORN has neither a release nor naming. > >

Re: Guidance on copyrights in sample code.

Hi James, Instead of including "Copyright (c) 2001, Apache Foobar Foundation" in the sample code, would it be possible/easy to "assume the copyright notice is in a file and include the file contents here". That is probably how you would want to do it anyway, considering the task of updating

Re: Guidance on copyrights in sample code.

> > How about just "Copyright (c) ..."? My understanding of the problem is that RAT reports that there is a copyright notice in the code. Craig > > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi James, >> >>

Re: Updating ip-clearance web site

-faq.html#PatentScope and http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas and http://www.apache.org/licenses/#submitting Craig > On Aug 6, 2017, at 5:30 PM, Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > > My idea is to put all of the common stuff into one document and have the > others refer

Updating ip-clearance web site

Can anyone here tell me what the life cycle is for ip-clearance? The guidelines at https://incubator.apache.org/guides/website.html say that ip-clearance is maintained in svn. The web page has a typo: https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html (search for "concensus") So I corrected

Re: Updating ip-clearance web site

er it, otherwise wait for the > nightly build. > > John > > On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 6:52 PM Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Can anyone here tell me what the life cycle is for ip-clearance? >> >> The guidelines at https://incubator.apache.org

Re: Updating ip-clearance web site

se to move the > content around how TLPs request IP Clearance into guides/ip_clearance.ad ? > > John > > On Sun, Aug 6, 2017 at 7:14 PM Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> Thanks for clarifying. >> >> I would like to

Re: [VOTE] Retire the MRQL Podling

+1 Craig > On Aug 14, 2017, at 5:50 AM, Fegaras, Leonidas wrote: > > Hi all, > After a discussion on the dev@mrql list [1], the MRQL community has > voted to retire the project [2]. I am now calling for a followup vote > on IPMC to confirm the decision to retire MRQL. >

Re: [VOTE]: Apache Weex-incubating Release 0.12.0-RC3

I also must vote -1 on this release. clr% find . -name "*.jar" ./android/playground/gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar ./android/sdk/gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar ./android/sdk/license/license-gradle-plugin-0.12.1.jar ./android/sdk/license/maven-license-plugin-1.10.b1.jar

Podling release vote terminology

I've seen a few (recent) incubator votes that imply that there are two separate, distinct votes: one in the podling and one in the incubator general. And lots of questions about binding votes and carried-over votes and whose votes are counted. I'd like to suggest: There is one vote for a

Re: Podling release vote terminology

elease manager begin > the second phase? No. The usual rules apply to the first phase. More positive than negative votes. At least three PPMC members must cast votes in order to go to the second phase. Craig > > On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com>

Update to licenses page for CCLA

In case anyone asks, I updated the licenses page http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas to start using the new cla-corporate.pdf http://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-corporate.pdf instead of the old cla-corporate.txt. The pdf version should be much easier to use and does not require users to

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Ignite - Persistent Store

> > > Cheers > Niclas > > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 5:47 AM, Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Let's all read the documentation on IP Clearance so we have a common basis >> for discussion. >> >> Craig >> >>> On May

Re: [VOTE]: Apache Weex-incubating Release 0.12.0-RC4

+1 Checked .asc signature Signing keys in KEYS file and in pgpkeys.mit.edu Checked LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER Sampled source files include license Good luck. Craig > On May 15, 2017, at 2:23 AM, sospartan wrote: > > Hi IPMC, > > I'm calling a vote for Weex-incubating

Re: private list subscriptions

> On May 20, 2017, at 4:54 PM, Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On May 20, 2017, at 4:05 PM, Henri Yandell <bay...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Dumb question time. > > I don't think the question is dumb. >> >> Sho

Re: private list subscriptions

> On May 20, 2017, at 4:05 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > > Dumb question time. I don't think the question is dumb. > > Should we encourage that @apache.org addresses are used when subscribing to > a private PMC list; and if not all PMC members have subscribed on a > podling,

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Ignite - Persistent Store

Hi John, I don't know all of the details of the code, but this is in regard to GridGain's grant via SGA of a persistent store system which is a substantial body of code not developed at Apache. So IMHO it is appropriate for the code grant to be reviewed. I don't see any issues except it's

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Ignite - Persistent Store

> On May 21, 2017, at 2:02 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 4:54 PM Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> I don't know all of the details of the code, but this is in regard to &

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Ignite - Persistent Store

Let's all read the documentation on IP Clearance so we have a common basis for discussion. Craig > On May 21, 2017, at 2:46 PM, Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On May 21, 2017, at 2:02 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: >>

Re: [VOTE]: Apache Weex-incubating Release 0.12.0-RC4

Hi sospartan, > On May 24, 2017, at 8:58 PM, sospartan wrote: > > Is this release have enough +1 bindings now? > I count rapheal, craig and john ~~ that's 3 of them. I shall prepare some > fireworks for this. Fireworks are deserved. Is there a weex app for that? :) Craig

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Ignite - Persistent Store

Hi Denis, Everything looks to be in order. Good luck. Craig > On May 22, 2017, at 1:28 PM, Denis Mag wrote: > > Folks, > > I've just followed well-described and clear "Process" section from this > page: > http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.html

Re: Images in source code.

Hi James, Everything that is not explicitly called out in the top level NOTICE and LICENSE files are licensed under the Apache 2.0 license. Adding a file to this directory might mislead people into thinking that they need to perform more due diligence with other files in other directories. My

Re: [VOTE] Retire the Blur Podling

+1 Craig > On Jun 18, 2017, at 9:30 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > All, > > This is a call to vote to retire the Blur podling. Blur has been > incubating for nearly 5 years and has not grown a community. It is > mutually felt that it is time to retire Blur. There was a

Re: [VOTE]: Apache Weex-incubating Release 0.12.0-RC3

> On May 6, 2017, at 10:04 AM, Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> 3. The java source files in android/commons/src are still in the >>> com.alibaba name space. Assuming that these are actually weex source files, >>> they must be repackaged

Re: [VOTE]: Apache Weex-incubating Release 0.12.0-RC3

xed for a future release, we can resolve them with "JIRA filed for next release". > > The only potential issues I see as legal impacting are the binaries and the > com.google source code. > > On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 9:23 PM Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrot

Re: [VOTE]: Apache Weex-incubating Release 0.12.0-RC3

> unclear if we left it out, as some people on this very list pushed for on a > previous RC. > > So, yes, I get pissed off as well. The incubator over time is getting more > and more intolerant at podling's first release, and I think it is the wrong > way to go. It is dishearteni

Re: [VOTE]: Apache Weex-incubating Release 0.12.0-RC3

I'm going to call foul on this one. If you cannot be civil, then leave the discussion to others. Craig > On May 3, 2017, at 7:24 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > BUT ALSO figuring out what to start looking for. For fak sake, > man Get a grip on reality! Craig L Russell

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Ignite - Persistent Store

> On May 25, 2017, at 11:33 AM, Denis Magda wrote: > > Folks, > > 72 hours have passed but nobody voted. Does it mean that the vote can be > closed saying that nobody is against the donation? Yes. Craig > > — > Denis > >> On May 23, 2017, at 5:30 PM, John D. Ament

Re: [VOTE] Graduate the Apache Juneau podling from Incubator to a TLP

+1 (IPMC binding) Good job. Craig > On Oct 9, 2017, at 7:11 AM, James Bognar wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > The Apache Juneau PPMC held a vote on the readiness for graduation of > Apache Juneau as a Top Level Project and came to a consensus to proceed > with graduation.

Re: [LAZY] Letting anyone invite on Slack

Hi Henri, We tried to use slack with the Juneau project and never got it to work "the Apache Way". Inviting people instead of self-service, no ability to monitor discussions, no archive of discussions. We gave up and now use the wiki whenever mail doesn't serve. Common editing of documents,

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 0.11.0 release RC3

Hi Henri, If a project was developed outside Apache then everyone who contributed to the project has to have an ICLA on file or file a Software Grant as part of IP Clearance. It's not sufficient that the code has always been under the ASL 2.0. Are there any contributors to the project before

Re: [VOTE] Apache MXNet (incubating) 0.11.0 release RC3

It looks like the request to vote on the release by the Incubator PMC was made on Friday August 25. This vote has been open more than 72 hours after the [VOTE] thread was opened. So it looks like you are good to release. Regards, Craig > On Aug 30, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Dominic Divakaruni >

Re: [VOTE] Do not accept software grants with conditionals or exclusions

-1 for an overly broad restriction that needs a bit of discretion. The situation that caused this issue to be raised is that a grant was made of a specific set of files contained in a .zip archive. That set of files contained no non-donated IP. The issue is that the grant had a list of excluded

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache PDFBox JBIG2 ImageIO Plugin

It might be useful to discuss under what terms we are considering incorporating this code. http://www.apache.org/licenses/#provenance describes three types of code. If we are preserving the original (alv2) license and copyright it's ok to redistribute it with the original headers. But if we

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache PDFBox JBIG2 ImageIO Plugin

Hi Andreas, > On Sep 24, 2017, at 10:17 PM, Andreas Lehmkuehler <andr...@lehmi.de> wrote: > > Am 25.09.2017 um 03:07 schrieb Craig Russell: >> It might be useful to discuss under what terms we are considering >> incorporating this code. >> http://www.apache.o

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Juneau 6.4.0-incubating-RC3

+1 binding Looks good. Craig > On Sep 29, 2017, at 1:54 PM, James Bognar wrote: > > The Apache Juneau Incubator PPMC has voted +4 to release Apache Juneau > 6.4.0-incubating RC3. This vote carries over +1 binding vote from IPMC > members. > > - Steve Blackmon > >

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache PDFBox JBIG2 ImageIO Plugin

Hi Andreas, > On Sep 25, 2017, at 9:37 AM, Andreas Lehmkuehler <andr...@lehmi.de> wrote: > > Am 25.09.2017 um 17:42 schrieb Craig Russell: >> Hi Andreas, >>> On Sep 24, 2017, at 10:17 PM, Andreas Lehmkuehler <andr...@lehmi.de> wrote: >>> >

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache PDFBox JBIG2 ImageIO Plugin

> On Sep 25, 2017, at 8:55 AM, John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Craig, > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:42 AM Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Andreas, >> >> >>> On Sep 24, 2017, at 10:17 PM, And

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache PDFBox JBIG2 ImageIO Plugin

t 1:39 PM, Andreas Lehmkuehler <andr...@lehmi.de> wrote: > > Am 25.09.2017 um 19:32 schrieb Craig Russell: >>> On Sep 25, 2017, at 8:55 AM, John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Craig, >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at

Re: [DISCUSS] Resolution to graduate the incubating Apache Trafodion Project

Hi Pierre, I'm afraid you might have missed the point of sebb's comment. I'll try to restate it. The resolution prologue should be much simpler: Establish the Apache Trafodion Project WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of the Foundation and consistent with the

Re: Graduation: who mails the board?

I agree this is a bit ambiguous. What you should do is to send a message to the board with a link to the [RESULT] message and add the resolution [to establish the project] to the board agenda. Craig > On Nov 11, 2017, at 8:33 PM, Jim Apple wrote: > > Impala just

  1   2   3   4   >