Re: Number of projects in Incubation [was: [VOTE] Release Apache Mynewt 0.9.0-incubating-rc1]

On 05/28/2016 05:25 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > Thanks Justin, > as always, snapshots in time is not as useful as trending data over time. I > guess it is time to take a look at whimsy.. :-) Or projects.apache.org :) Since there's already an incubator chart there - should be easy to add another

[RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Pony Mail into the Apache Incubator

AM, Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> Daniel Gruno wrote on 5/24/16 1:56 AM: >>> Since it seems the discussion has died down, I am now calling a vote on >>> accepting Pony Mail into the Incubator. Sorry in advanc

[VOTE] Accept Pony Mail into the Apache Incubator

, in which the various facets of developers and contributors help keep the project up to date with latest developments and technical as well as social needs. Current Status Meritocracy: The bulk of the code has been written by Daniel Gruno to date, but has had oversight from other committers, a

Re: [PROPOSAL] Pony Mail

On 05/21/2016 12:45 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > It does very clearly. > > If you're looking for more mentors, I'd be happy to help (we recommend 3 > mentors for a podling). Granted most of the proposed PPMC qualify as > mentors as well. You are most welcome to add your name to the proposal

Re: [PROPOSAL] Pony Mail

Lastly, there are issues like branding etc which is more easily solved as a podling. I hope this has answered your question. With regards, Daniel. > > John > > On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:55 PM Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi again folks, >> I would

[PROPOSAL] Pony Mail

d reliable community, in which the various facets of developers and contributors help keep the project up to date with latest developments and technical as well as social needs. Current Status Meritocracy: The bulk of the code has been written by Daniel Gruno to date, but has had oversight

Re: Looking for a champion (and maybe a mentor)

you are more than welcome to help out wherever you feel like :) I'll add your name to the proposal and we'll get started with the it shortly :) With regards, Daniel. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On May 19, 2016, at 11:13 AM, Daniel Gruno <rum...@cord.dk> wrote: >> >>

Looking for a champion (and maybe a mentor)

Hi folks! We (a bunch of ASF people and then some) are looking for a champion for a new podling proposal called Pony Mail. Unfortunately, the original champion had to bow out due to time constraints, so we are looking for a new one. We are mostly ASF/IPMC members, so we could do it ourselves, but

Re: GitHub vs. the mailing lists

On 05/18/2016 07:00 PM, Mike Jumper wrote: > On May 18, 2016 9:54 AM, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" wrote: >> >> Hi Mike, >> >> it's what we are doing at Beam. >> >> A PR submission result: >> - to a mail on the mailing list >> - to a comment in Jira (if the PR contains commit with

Re: Adding a podling committer

depends on whether it's git or svn. for git, if you're in the incubator ldap group, all is well. if not, get someone from the IPMC to add you. for svn, you'll need to add the user to the svn auth file in the infrastructure-puppet repository. With regards, Daniel. On 04/22/2016 10:36 AM, Colm O

Re: [VOTE] TinkerPop 3.1.2-incubating Release

+1 (binding) With regards, Daniel. On 04/14/2016 08:46 AM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > +1 (binding) > > I checked: > - incubating in name > - signatures good > - DISCLAIMER(s) exists > - source LICENSE and NOTICE good > - binary LICENSEs and NOTICEs good > - no unexpected binaries in source

Re: [VOTE] TinkerPop 3.2.0-incubating Release

+1 from me as well. With regards, Daniel. On 04/14/2016 09:15 AM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > +1 (binding) > > I checked: > - incubating in name > - signatures good > - DISCLAIMER(s) exists > - source and binary LICENSE/NOTICE identical to 3.1.2 release (and no new > copyrights) so all

Re: [VOTE] release of Metron_0.1BETA_rc7

/github.com/apache/incubator-metron/blob/Metron_0.1BETA_rc7/LICENSE#L306 >> >> If we didn't do that right, let us know and we'll change it PDQ. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Casey >> >> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: &g

Re: [VOTE] release of Metron_0.1BETA_rc7

I ran it through my usual compliance check, which yielded: Non-compliant license (Mozilla Public License/2.0) found in incubator-metron-Metron_0.1BETA_rc7/metron-streaming/Metron-Common/src/test/resources/effective_tld_names.dat Non-compliant license (Mozilla Public License/2.0) found in

Re: [VOTE] Graduate TinkerPop from Incubator

d to have primary responsibility > for management of the projects within the scope of > responsibility of the Apache TinkerPop 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 > Ap

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ranger 0.5.2 (incubating)

On 03/06/2016 02:45 PM, Madhan Neethiraj wrote: > Incubator PMC, > > The release artifacts are now available under https://dist.apache.org. Please > use the new locations given below. > > Artifacts for this release are given below: > - Git tag for the release: >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Guacamole into the Apache incubator

inging Guacamole to Apache is to foster growth >> within the project and its community of developers and users. We have no >> plans to make use of the Apache brand in press releases, nor to >> advertise acceptance of Guacamole into Apache Incubator. >> >> == Required Resources == >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Guacamole into the Apache incubator

..@guacamole.incubator.apache.org > * d...@guacamole.incubator.apache.org > * iss...@guacamole.incubator.apache.org > > === Git Repository === > > * https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-guacamole.git > > === Issue Tracking === > > * JIRA Project G

Re: How to trigger GitHub mirror

On 01/28/2016 07:27 AM, Markus Geiß wrote: > Ed, > > thanks. We already have an integration setup, somehow my changes are not > reflecting to the mirror. Seems to have been fixed now. Might have been some issues down the chain (I notice GitHub was completely dead earlier today). If you want to

Re: How to switch default HEAD at Git

On 01/28/2016 08:02 AM, Markus Geiß wrote: > Hey all, > > we want to use a develop branch as the default/HEAD instead of master. > > I know how to change it via GitHub and locally, but I'm not sure what the > correct procedure within an Apache repo is. File a ticket in JIRA with infra to have

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Guacamole Incubator Proposal

Hi Mike, Sounds interesting! I'm always happy to see more UI stuff make it to Apache (I'll save my many jokes about Java till later :p). Just so the "several ASF veterans [...] are listed in this proposal" can be true, you can put me down as a mentor if need be. With regards, Daniel. On

Re: [VOTE] Accept the iota project into the Apache Incubator

nse Agreements for all committers on the project. Upon >>> entering Apache, Litbit will sign a Software Grant Agreement (SGA): >>> https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt >>> >>> External Dependencies >>> >>> To the best of our knowledge, a

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-singa-incubating-0.2.0

+0.999 - seem okay but some files are missing license headers. The seemingly GPL (some aren't GPL at all) files Justin linked to have exceptions for use which allows it. I ran it through my usual stuff, http://compliance.rocks/result.html?358649c0 - and every single GPL-licensed file has an

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-singa-incubating-0.2.0

L > being OK'd to use in an AL release. > > John > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 7:41 AM Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: > >> +0.999 - seem okay but some files are missing license headers. >> >> The seemingly GPL (some aren't GPL at all) files Justi

Re: [VOTE] Apache Slider (incubating) release 0.90.2-incubating

Tentative +0.5 License and Notice there, no binaries in src archive, digests match License count as follows: Apache License/2.0: 1196 BSD 3-Clause License: 2 License missing: 101 (see below) Python License/2.0: 2 See http://compliance.rocks/result.html?1152a2a9 for a list of minor nits (missing

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating

ld think this is a do-over with a source package to be voted on in the podling and then passed to the IPMC for approval. With regards, Daniel. [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list > > Regards > JB > > On 12/28/2015 07:48 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: &g

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating

e release vote will pass. > > Regards > JB > > On 12/28/2015 07:31 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: >> On 12/28/2015 07:26 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I submit Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating release to your vote. >>> >>&g

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating

On 12/28/2015 07:26 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi all, > > I submit Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating release to your vote. > > A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed with 7 +1s. > > Vote thread: >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tempo - A proposal for an enterprise IoT platform

Top-posting because solidwalloftext. Sounds quite interesting, and it's (mostly) within language scopes I'm comfortable with (python, JS etc). I'd like to volunteer as a mentor for this, should it be approved. With regards, Daniel On 12/02/2015 09:34 PM, Tony Faustini wrote: > To:

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

On 12/01/2015 11:37 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > On 1 December 2015 at 14:32, Bertrand Delacretaz > wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: >>> ... >>> Binding -1s (4): >>> Greg Stein >>> Ralph Goers >>> Roman

Re: [VOTE] TinkerPop 3.1.0-incubating Release

+1 (binding) Passed my usual compliance checks. With regards, Daniel. On 11/23/2015 09:28 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote: > +1 (binding) > > So far I've checked in the source release: signatures and digests, source > releases file layouts, matched git tags and commit ids, incubator suffix > and

Re: Incubator mail archives lagging badly

On 11/20/2015 08:04 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Mike Percy wrote: >> Is the ASF mail archive webapp OSS?... > > I don't know about the current one but AFAIK > https://github.com/Humbedooh/ponymail is an (experimental so far) > potential

Re: Mentor disengagement - a suggestion

And sometimes, s/spare/sparring partner/ :) I find it extremely useful to have a fellow mentor to bounce ideas and perceptions off on. Sometimes having a really engaged mentor and a more loosely engaged works well, as you get both a view from the inside and the outside. With regards, Daniel. On

Re: Mentor disengagement - a suggestion

discussion if it impacts the project/community in any way. With regards, Daniel. On 10/14/2015 03:15 PM, Marko Rodriguez wrote: > Hello, > > I concur with this. Once we got one of our mentors engaged -- Daniel Gruno -- > its been smooth sailing. You know how we got him engaged? HipCha

Re: A question: Is it alright to say no to potential podlings?

On 10/13/2015 04:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Andrew Bayer wrote: >> ...I want to be sure I can still -1 it without being >> turned into a pariah in the process. =)... > > I don't see a problem with a -1 when voting to accept a

Re: A question: Is it alright to say no to potential podlings?

On 10/13/2015 04:40 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > On 10/13/2015 04:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Andrew Bayer <andrew.ba...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> ...I want to be sure I can still -1 it without being >>> turned into a pariah in

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache REEF 0.13.0-incubating (rc1)

Did the usual checks; - Sigs, hash etc checks - unpacks fine - license, notice present - Things are apache licensed :) There are a few C# files missing license headers, see http://compliance.rocks/result.html?23410ea9 - but that's nothing that can't be fixed. I also saw a BSD license but no BSD

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On 10/11/2015 03:44 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:36 AM Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: >>> >>>> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com>:

Re: [DISCUSS] [REVISED] Mentor neutrality policy

tatement procedures should the mentor wish to redeem > themselves. Mentors cannot stay with the podling when it graduates. > > > Regards, > Alan > >> On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:07 AM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Hi Incubator folks, >>

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

5 at 5:14 PM > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy > >> I do not agree with this proposal I will elaborate more later >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On Oct 9, 201

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

gt; >> If you are a in the original community behind the project, you cannot > mentor it nor vote for/against it. > > ​This diminishes the pool of available mentors and in particular those > probably most vested in the success of the podling.​ > > > > > On Fr

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

f rude responses to uncivil accusations is > unproductive, even if it is an IPMC tradition. -C > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: >> Hi Incubator folks, >> >> I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for >

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On 10/09/2015 08:02 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz > <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: >>> ...Furthermore, I would lik

[DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Hi Incubator folks, I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for incubating podlings: - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project or its incubation status. - A mentor must not have a vested interest in incubating, graduating or dismantling a podling that goes beyond

Re: Fwd: [VOTE] Release Apache Open Climate Workbench 1.0.0

+1 - Sigs okay - Digest matches archive - license and notice in order There are a few missing license headers, but other than that, it seems okay. See http://compliance.rocks/result.html?d704977 for more details about the headers. With regards, Daniel. On 09/18/2015 01:13 PM, lewis john

Re: [VOTE] Ripple Release 0.9.32

I am unsure whether this is a request for IPMC votes, or just a notice that a vote is coming. The subject does not match the first line of text :) In any case, I checked the RC, verified the archive ( http://compliance.rocks/result.html?25e563c1 ) with a few 3rdparty and CSS files excluded in the

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Usergrid from the Incubator

There's a typo in the resolution: should be jfarr...@apache.org, not jfarr...@apachge.org ;) With regards, Daniel. On 2015-08-10 18:15, Dave wrote: The Usergrid project has made three releases from the Incubator (1.0.0, 1.0.1 and 1.0.2), has added multiple and diverse committers, and the

Re: Fwd: [VOTE] Graduate Usergrid from the incubator

Why are certain mentors left out of this resolution while others are put on the new PMC without any discussion anywhere about this? I'd very much like an answer or a change to the resolution text. With regards, Daniel. On 2015-08-07 17:19, Dave wrote: The Usergrid podling has voted to proceed

Re: Fwd: [VOTE] Graduate Usergrid from the incubator

be a discussion on who should be on the PMC. I don't see any such discussion, nor do I see (or hear) them saying they are fine with it or don't want to be a part of the PMC. With regards, Daniel. On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 11:55 AM Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org wrote: Why are certain mentors left

Re: Fwd: [VOTE] Graduate Usergrid from the incubator

PM Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org wrote: On 08/07/2015 06:44 PM, John D. Ament wrote: I believe the reasoning is that some mentors want to move forward with the Usergrid TLP, while others were around to help with incubation only. Its been typical for a podling to not graduate with all

Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

On 2015-08-04 13:01, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: ...Which would be totally fine and gets us back to the point Daniel and I were discussing: a release compliance team (horrible name, I know) as part of ASF IMO

Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

On 2015-08-03 09:37, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 4:05 AM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: ...who else thinks the movement towards empowering PPMCs and making IPMC very much like the board makes sense?... How is that different from the status quo where a

Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

On 2015-08-03 21:13, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: Yup. I believe this to be an unfortunate (at least from my standpoint) but and extremely fair observation. As far as I'm concerned the issue of RRs of IPMC is in a state of a stalemate right now. We clearly have a everything's fine lets just add

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

Apologies in advance for slightly crossing threads here. Even though I have already sent quite a lot of emails on this subject (12 over the past week!), I feel I must reply to some of the concerns and opinions expressed in the last few emails. I do not like it when concerns are answered with

Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

On 2015-07-26 10:56, jan i wrote: No that is an important service, on the other hand I also agree that the mentors should be guiding/running the podlings not general@ Maybe we can find some middle ground. - Mentors run the podlings, can accept releases etc. - Mentors decide when a podlng can

Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

On 2015-07-27 01:20, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: I'd like to raise a somewhat orthogonal point. Mainly the fact that our obsession with doing good work with podlings could, very well, be obscuring a much more important issues. And given how limited our resources of eyeballs looking at releases

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

I'll keep it short :) I fully agree that many of these issues should have been addressed much earlier, it would have been better that way. I don't think our current incubation process in tandem with this being a volunteer process is doing the right thing at all times, and I am more than

Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

Since I am relatively new to the Incubator (given that it turns 13 in just 2½ month), I will ask a question that may have been answered in the earlier years: Have we given any thought to some sort of mentor rotation policy? One could argue that what we especially lack right now is the

Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

On 2015-07-27 00:04, Ross Gardler wrote: Wait. I think this is overstating the displeasure. I don't see anyone saying the feedback is not valuable. I see mentors being asked to clearly state their recommendation with reference to the feedback. The thread was too long and argumentative to

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

On 07/24/2015 03:22 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: On 24.07.2015 01:25, Valentin Kulichenko wrote: I do agree that our Jira handling could be better and believe that community has already responded to these discussions and addressed some of the raised concerns. The truth is that so far many Jira

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

On 07/22/2015 09:23 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: I reviewed Ignite’s commit log and email lists. I got the impression of a split personality: The dev list[1] is very open and clearly following the Apache Way. Meanwhile, the commit log[2] is (to my eyes at least) difficult to decipher. In the

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

On 2015-07-23 00:31, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: Thanks Julian - that's something that this community would have it improve. Although I don't see if a particular way of using (or not using) JIRA is a graduation's requirement. If there's a way to trace a particular feature to an archived

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

, Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org wrote: Quoting Roy out of context Daniel, unless you can substantiate the above claim I suggest you retract your statement. In open communities an accusation that you just threw at me carries a lot of weight and I will absolutely NOT tolerate baseless accusations

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

at 22:48, Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org wrote: On 07/21/2015 10:39 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: Present time diversity or lack of same is not a bar to graduation. So we should just scrap the bit in the Incubator policy that says A major criterion for graduation is to have developed an open and diverse

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

matter of fact evidence supporting your claim. Thanks Cos On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:48PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: On 07/21/2015 10:39 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: Present time diversity or lack of same is not a bar to graduation. So we should just scrap the bit in the Incubator policy that says

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: On 07/21/2015 10:39 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: Present time diversity or lack of same is not a bar to graduation. So we should just scrap the bit in the Incubator policy that says A major criterion for graduation is to have developed an open and diverse meritocratic

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

On 07/21/2015 10:39 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: Present time diversity or lack of same is not a bar to graduation. So we should just scrap the bit in the Incubator policy that says A major criterion for graduation is to have developed an open and diverse meritocratic community.? I think not.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

On 2015-07-22 00:15, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org wrote: Accusation of what exactly? Quoting Roy out of context. Here's what you said: Quoting Roy out of context is not a Hail Mary you can just throw out there when someone

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

On 2015-07-22 00:41, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:17AM, Daniel Gruno wrote: Is this a reply to me or to Pierre? I have not mentioned 63% anywhere. I have stated that we have a policy that states that a podling must have an open and diverse meritocratic community

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

On 2015-07-22 00:47, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:33AM, Daniel Gruno wrote: On 2015-07-22 00:15, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org wrote: Accusation of what exactly? Quoting Roy out of context. Here's what

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

On 2015-07-22 01:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org wrote: Nitpicking time. Your supposedly vendor-neutral web site says: GridGain Community Edition is a binary build of Apache Ignite created by GridGain, which includes optional

[DISCUSS] Diversity policy (WAS: Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

On 07/22/2015 01:36 AM, Chris Douglas wrote: Daniel- This has been discussed recently in graduations for Tez [1], Drill [2], and other projects whose continued incubation serves no purpose. If by this you mean the Incubator has taught the podling what it needs to know, and the podling is

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating

Changed. Thanks for pointing it out! With regards, Daniel. On 2015-07-13 13:51, Cédric Champeau wrote: Here: http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#host-rc 2015-07-13 13:48 GMT+02:00 Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org: Where is this documentation? If it is stated anywhere

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating

that suggests to put RC on personal space on p.a.o. -- Gianmarco On 13 July 2015 at 13:55, Cédric Champeau cedric.champ...@gmail.com wrote: Right. Will make sure to use it next time. 2015-07-13 12:53 GMT+02:00 Daniel Gruno humbed...@apache.org: Hi Cédric, The whole point of the /dev/ branch on dist

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating

Hi Cédric, The whole point of the /dev/ branch on dist is for putting release candidates to be voted on. Once a release is approved, it is then moved to the /release/ branch. people.apache.org really should not be used for this, especially as that machine will probably disappear in the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating

, Daniel Gruno a écrit : Where is this documentation? If it is stated anywhere that people.apache.org is an acceptable place for RCs, it is clearly wrong and needs fixing. It's not written, it's a common usage for almost all of the projects, AFAICT. It's good to know that it's not the right place

Re: [GROOVY] mailing lists are ready, see you there!

On 2015-03-27 20:12, Guillaume Laforge wrote: As a first step, I'll start with warning our users about that upcoming change. Also, I have a question. So, the address during incubation is: d...@groovy.incubator.apache.org But when we successfully get out of incubation, there will be an

Wiki access

Can someone grant Humbedooh write access to the wiki, please? With regards, Daniel. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Final draft of IPMC report for January 2015

Ashutosh Chauhan Benjamin Hindman Daniel Gruno David Blevins Devaraj Das Drew Farris Enis Soztutar Gerhard Petracek Henri Gomez Henry Saputra Lewis John Mcgibbney Luciano Resende Marcel Offermans Matt Hogstrom Nick Burch

Re: [VOTE][Proposal] TinkerPop: A Graph Computing Framework [RE-SUBMISSION]

(mentor) * Daniel Gruno (mentor) * Marko Rodriguez (submitting on behalf of TinkerPop) We feel it is now in prime shape from submission to vote. Enjoy!. (URL to wiki version: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TinkerPopProposal) A. Abstract TinkerPop http://tinkerpop.com/ is a graph computing

Re: [Proposal] TinkerPop: A Graph Computing Framework

On 2014-12-18 17:28, Sam Ruby wrote: On 12/18/2014 11:16 AM, Marko Rodriguez wrote: Hello Jake, When talking with Sam Ruby (cc:d) we voiced our concerns about moving all of our infrastructure over to The Apache Foundation. In particular, our GitHub presence and our public user-mailing list

Re: [VOTE] accept corinthia into incubator

...@apache.org Louis Suárez-Potts, lo...@apache.org Peter Kelly, pe...@uxproductivity.com (ICLA recorded) Svante Schubert, svanteschub...@apache.org == Affiliations == None == Sponsors == === Champion === Jan Iversen === Nominated Mentors === Jan Iversen (IPMC) Daniel Gruno (IPMC

Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Falcon from the Incubator

JIRA tickets, releases etc is all very fascinating, but what about the community growth? Do you have any statistics on that, and more specifically, the diversity of the project? I don't mean to be a grump, but Apache is about community over code, so you should really present that the

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Argus Proposal

On 07/18/2014 09:33 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: Sorry that should be but I have not found one yet. On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Owen O'Malley omal...@apache.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Henry Saputra henry.sapu...@gmail.com wrote: when all PPMCs including mentors and

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Allura 1.1.0 incubating

/14 6:28 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote: -1. files check out, but Allura doesn't work :( checksums match, installation works, though not very well on ubuntu minimal 13.10, dependencies cannot be met, I had to rewrite requiements-common.txt to use Ming 0.4.3 instead of 0.4.2 which doesn't exist

Re: Github pull request hooks

or assumed lazy) is reached, a committer/pmc member will merge the PR closing both github PR and resolving JIRA. Comments on usefulness of this? I am sure I am missing something here. Thanks, Suresh On Feb 8, 2014, at 6:51 AM, Daniel Gruno rum...@cord.dk wrote: Let me just get some

Re: Github pull request hooks

decision that I'm not going to go 180 on just yet. With regards, Daniel. On 02/10/2014 02:49 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: cc'ing infra, as this is really an infra topic. Yes, it is possible - anything is possible, but it will require quite a lot of work from Infra to make this possible. I would

Re: Github pull request hooks

workflows etc), but this will all depend on how this initial phase goes along. With regards, Daniel. On 02/07/2014 10:02 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: We had a bit of a snafu on adding PR titles to the subject lines, but it's been taken care of now. With regards, Daniel. On 02/07/2014 09:57 PM

Re: Github pull request hooks

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Jake Farrell jfarr...@apache.org wrote: I just wanted to follow up on my previous comments about the Github webhooks not posting comments, Daniel Gruno and I have been debugging the Github webhooks we had in place to send pull request notifications and we have fixed

Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator

On 02/06/2014 07:34 PM, Michael Joyce wrote: Let's try this again Marvin since you're jumping to the wrong conclusions here. If people are concerned about work on Github not being automatically mirrored to ASF mailing lists that's an Infra problem. They should go talk to them to help get it

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Allura (incubating) v1.0.1

On 11/04/2013 07:09 PM, Cory Johns wrote: Hello, This is a call for a vote on Apache Allura 1.0.1 incubating. This is our second attempt at an initial release, which specifically addresses the concerns raised in the previous, cancelled vote. A vote was held on developer mailing list and

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Allura (incubating) v1.0.1

On 11/08/2013 07:52 PM, Dave Brondsema wrote: On 11/8/13 6:17 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote: On 11/04/2013 07:09 PM, Cory Johns wrote: Hello, This is a call for a vote on Apache Allura 1.0.1 incubating. This is our second attempt at an initial release, which specifically addresses the concerns

Re: [DISCUSS] [PROPOSAL] Apache Monitoring

On 09/25/2013 09:21 AM, Tammo van Lessen wrote: Baldr is fine with me, my only concern is the similarity to Apache Buildr. Just a heads up from infra; baldr.apache.org is already very much a thing, and has been for more than five years. If it can be avoided, we'd really appreciate it if we can

Re: [VOTE] Accept Apache BeanShell in the Incubator

+1 (non-binding) With regards, Daniel. On 05/24/2013 09:23 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote: Dear ASF members, We would like to propose BeanShell for the incubator. The proposal draft is available at: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeanShellProposal, follows below the proposal Open is

Re: [VOTE] Graduate CloudStack from Incubator

Top-posting since this is a long letter and you just need to see whether it's +1 or -1 ;) So here: +1 (non-binding). I've seen your work flow from an infra perspective, and it seems vibrant and well oiled, and I'm pleased to see this vote. You're an easy team to work with (that is my opinion at

Re: [VOTE] Accept Apache Open Climate Workbench into the Incubator

On 02/05/2013 05:18 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: Hi Folks, OK, now that discussion has settled down, I'd like to call a VOTE for acceptance of Apache Open Climate Workbench into the Incubator. I'll leave the VOTE open the rest of the week and close it out next Monday, February 11th

Assistance appreciated: comments.apache.org

Hello everyone, I've been put in charge of building http://comments.apache.org, a new commenting system that projects can use for adding comments to any page they want to. If you haven't heard about this yet, or need an introduction to it before reading on, please take a look at

Re: [VOTE] [PROPOSAL] Allura to enter the Incubator

On 06/21/2012 06:34 PM, Rich Bowen wrote: Hi, We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would like to request that the IPMC votes on this issue. The requisite 72 hours has passed since the initial proposal. The proposal may be found at

<    1   2