Re: List of Projects that went straight to Top Level Projects

Most of the projects mentioned so far have been “internal” - code developed to help run the ASF. “External” projects also go straight-to-TLP and are more important because they have many more users and greater impact on the world. A couple of examples I am aware of have been “refactorings”,

Re: [VOTE] Accept DataSketches into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) > On Mar 14, 2019, at 2:23 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > Hi all, > > We've discussed the proposal for the DataSketches project in [1] and [2]. > The > proposal itself has been put on the wiki [3]. > > Per incubator rules [4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the new >

Re: [DISCUSS] introduce "[DISCUSS]" threads for podling non-ASF release candidates

This change would be useful. As a release manager of a podling, the most disheartening thing is latency. The usual practice is a 72 hour PPMC release vote, followed by a 72 hour IPMC vote, one of which will cross a weekend, so a negative vote on the last day of the IPMC vote adds at least a

Re: Podlings not following ASF release policy

I’m a mentor of Druid. We allowed Druid to continue making releases outside of Apache during incubation because ASF releases were not possible. There were various reasons - they could not release from main line because IP transfer had not been completed (if I recall correctly), and they also

Re: Incubator exit interview

nik wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:14 AM Kevin A. McGrail wrote: >> On 1/14/2019 1:01 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: >>> I don’t think the “decisions should be made on-list” principle applies to >>> all communication. (Otherwise why would we allow hallway conversations

Re: Incubator exit interview

. Julian > On Jan 14, 2019, at 5:25 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Isn't that starting off on the wrong foot? off list communication, > non-transparancy, > treating the VP of the PMC as "more" than an administrative position, etc... > >> On Dec 22, 20

Re: Incubator exit interview

Another idea is for Justin (or someone else active in the IPMC) to have a phone call with the incoming chair of the newly-graduated project. People are more likely to open up in an "off the record" and interactive setting. This would be in addition to the written questions. On Sat, Dec 22, 2018

apache-website-template

Who owns the https://github.com/apache/apache-website-template/ repo? I thought (perhaps mistakenly) that I was a committer, processed a pull request, and now I find that I cannot push. I see that Justin, Luciano and Stian have successfully made commits in the past. My branch is at

Re: Hello World / CRUNCH Framework

Hi Julian, Regarding whether to do this as a streaming engine (with its own query language) or as a framework above a streaming engine, I’d say that’s a false choice. If there is relational algebra inside your system, you can provide a high-level query language that can be translated to a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Druid (incubating) 0.13.0 [RC4]

Druid devs, Sorry, I forgot to forward my +1 (binding) from the PPMC vote. No matter; the vote passed. Well done! There were some important comments from Justin, Dave and Von during the vote. I recommend suggest that you log an issue (or issues) with their remarks now, and be sure to fix

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Airflow to TLP

+1 (binding) > On Dec 5, 2018, at 3:31 PM, Jakob Homan wrote: > > Hello- > > The Airflow podling community has VOTEd[0] to graduate, following a > very successful DISCUSS[1]. Accordingly I'm bringing the resolution > up for an IPMC VOTE. > > The podling result was: > Overall: 21 x +1 votes,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.1-incubating (rc8)

+1 (binding) Downloaded, checked signatures, LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, built using JDK 8 on Linux, ran apache-rat. Checked that source tar ball matches git at 08c75b55f7f97be869049cf80a0da5347e550a3d. In binary artifacts, checked signatures, LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER. Julian > On Nov

Re: [VOTE] Retire Quickstep podling from Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) > On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:08 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > +1 (Binding) > >> On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:03 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >> >> Hi! >> >> after a discussion with the Quickstep community: >>

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

+1 to what Bertrand wrote. Solves the problem very neatly. Thank you, Bertrand. It goes a long way towards answering my original question, because “What should voters check for when reviewing binary artifacts?” is now a matter for each PMC, not a matter for the Foundation. +1 to Roman’s

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

+1 to everything Mark Thomas said. On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 3:08 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > > On 13/11/2018 20:49, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > Personally, given the amount of binary releases that are distributed off of > > our very own infrastructure (and I'm not even counting our namespace > > on

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

The question with which I started this discussion has not been answered. Given that a collection of artifacts is up for a vote, and those artifacts are a mixture of source and binary artifacts, what is a reviewer to do: 1. Vote -1. The release contains binaries. 2. Perform some cursory checks on

Re: [VOTE] Accept the Iceberg project for incubation

+1 (binding) Julian > On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Arthur Wiedmer wrote: > > +1 > > (Non-binding) > > Best, > Arthur > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 09:24 Hugo Louro >> +1 (non-binding) >> >>> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Owen O'Malley >> wrote: >>> >>> +1 (binding) >>> On Tue, Nov

Re: [VOTE] Accept the brpc Project into the Apache Incubator.

+1 (binding) > On Nov 8, 2018, at 11:29 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Regards, > Dave > >> On Nov 8, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> Hi - >> >> This is a VOTE to accept the brpc Project into the Apache Incubator. >> >> It will last for at least 72 hours and will

Re: [VOTE] Accept burp into the Apache Incubator

Dave, You’ll want to cancel this vote. The subject line is an unfortunate victim of auto-correct. Julian > On Nov 8, 2018, at 11:06 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > Hi - > > This is a VOTE to accept the brpc Project into the Apache Incubator. > > It will last for at least 72 hours and will pass

Re: licenses and copyrights of dependencies

What Alex is saying makes sense. Whether you like it or not, you are creating a derived work (or something - I am not a lawyer), and that needs its own L > On Nov 7, 2018, at 9:03 AM, Alex Harui wrote: > > IIRC, we use the food allergy analogy for these situations. AIUI, the goal > is for

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Crail-1.1-incubating [rc3]

Forwarding my vote from the PPMC vote: +1 (binding) I checked the source artifacts but not the binary artifacts. Therefore I agree with Justin that the source artifacts can be included in the release but not the binary artifacts. Julian On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 1:04 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > >

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

fact that LICENSE policy that Justin linked to applies to > convenience binaries creates confusion about reviewing binaries. > > My 2 cents, > -Alex > > On 10/25/18, 6:39 PM, "Greg Stein" wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 12:25 PM Julian Hyde wrote

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

t;> >>> When reviewing binary archives we need to make sure that the license file >>> is updated with the shiped dependencies licenses appropriately and that >>> they are all compatible with the Apache License (notice file might also >>> need to be u

How to review so-called "binary releases"?

It has been said many times that Apache does not do binary releases, only source releases. But users like binary releases (or pre-built binary artifacts, if you prefer), and therefore podlings like to create them. So, is there any guidance for how to review a release that contains source and

Re: Email to be sent to inactive mentors

By that argument there’s no point speaking at ApacheCon. Because it doesn’t happen on a mailing list. So let’s not be so strict. Clearly there are many ways that a mentor can assist. Some of them are not measurable (such as having a phone call). But I think any measurable activity should

Re: Incubator release checklist

Releases are invariably created from a particular commit from the source control system (usually a git commit these days). I think it’s important to check that the contents of the source tarball match the contents of the source control system at that commit. (To do this, I unpack the tar file

Re: Email to be sent to inactive mentors

Perhaps add some recognition in the text of the email that there may be activity that we are unaware of? (Unlikely, but it seems rude to presume.) I strongly support your efforts to hold mentors accountable. Thanks for doing it, Justin! Julian On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 5:53 PM Justin Mclean

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

Thanks for doing this, Justin. It must have taken quite a while. You've convinced me that missing sign-off is a reasonable proxy for mentor disengagement. Just curious: As you were reviewing lists looking for mentor activity, did you learn anything about patterns of mentor behavior? Are there any

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

I hear what you’re saying. As a metric it’s better than nothing, but let’s not assume it is telling us everything. I believe that asking all mentors to sign off is a change in policy or at least in practice. (Neither the “Mentors’ guide”[1] nor the “Guide to being a mentor”[2] talks about

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

There is a strong presumption here that a mentor is fulfilling their duty if and only if they sign the reports. I’m skeptical. I can think of cases where an engaged mentor does not sign reports (because someone else has done it), and vice versa where a disengaged mentor shows up once a quarter

Re: Dealing with Unresponsive Mentors

There was a long thread about absent mentors a few months ago[1]. The consensus on the thread seemed to be to introduce some metrics. I was and am skeptical of that approach because it requires constant attention from the IPMC. The solution I advocated in that thread is to encourage podlings to

Re: Poddlings length of time in the incubator

Regarding Quickstep. I am a mentor. (One mentor resigned earlier this year, but the other mentor, Roman, is sufficiently engaged.) I am concerned that Quickstep is not going to graduate. They are functioning well as an academic project, as evidenced by papers at top conferences[1], but all of

Re: Apache account creation issues

I have submitted an account request. Sorry the original request got ignored by the Druid mentors, including myself. Just in case, please check your spam folder: I emailed you yesterday that I had submitted an account request, apparently before you sent this email, and it’s possible that other

Re: Looking for Champion

Note that there is an existing database product called Palo - an open source OLAP engine by German company Jedox[1]. There there is a high likelihood that Palo would have to change its name during incubation, if accepted. Julian [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_(OLAP_database)

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC3)

Willem, You didn’t cast a vote on the release. I don’t think test failures is a blocker because README.md tells people to skip tests. IPMC, We still need one more +1, please. Julian > On May 23, 2018, at 12:23 AM, Jonas Pfefferle wrote: > > Hi, > > At the moment there

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC3)

Forwarding my vote from the PPMC vote: +1 (binding) Julian > On May 22, 2018, at 12:29 AM, Jonas Pfefferle wrote: > > Forgot to add: > > Release artifacts have been signed with the following key: > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/pepperjo.asc > > Thanks, > Jonas

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

in using the parent. If so, you can >> just pull out the distribution logic from the parent pom's repo ( >> https://github.com/apache/maven-apache-parent/blob/master/pom.xml#L336-L417 >> ) and merge that into the Crail pom. >> >> John >> >> On 2018/05

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

, at 11:42 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Julian, > > On 2018/05/10 18:40:12, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org > <mailto:jh...@apache.org>> wrote: >> I agree about the missing DISCLAIMER file and the missing disclaimer in >>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

I agree about the missing DISCLAIMER file and the missing disclaimer in README.md. -1 until those are fixed. Regarding directories, I disagree. Common practice is to have everything (including NOTICE, README and DISCLAIMER) in a directory that is named after the release. If you do otherwise,

Re: Publishing Maven artifacts under third-party coordinates (was: Set up Nexus staging profile for Dubbo ...)

In other words, there are several ways to prove that a binary release is WRONG but (to Greg’s point) there is no way to prove it RIGHT. As a mentor, I strongly advise against podlings making binary releases, especially for the first release. It’s difficult enough to get L correct for source

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

IPMC members, This vote has been open 72 hours and has two votes so far (Luciano and I are mentors). I’d really appreciate it if someone else could download and vote. This is Crail’s first release in the incubator but in my opinion they’re in pretty good shape. Julian > On May 7, 2018, at

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

Forwarding my vote from the PPMC vote: +1 (binding) Julian > On May 7, 2018, at 7:49 AM, Jonas Pfefferle wrote: > > Please vote to approve the source release of Apache Crail 1.0-incubating > (RC2). > > The podling dev vote thread: >

Re: Review mailing list membership?

I’m one of your (druid codling’s) mentors and, yes, I moderate the druid lists. I tried a week or so ago to list the members of druid’s lists and struck out. In twenty minutes, I couldn’t find the solutions listed below: whimsy and dev-l...@druid.apache.org .

Re: Default webpages for new podlings

Just to clarify, in case people are not familiar with Jekyll. It is a code generator that a developer runs in their sandbox, and it generates the site. The developer then checks in the site to git or svn. So, the developer has complete control over the HTML that is checked in. They can

Re: Default webpages for new podlings

Luciano created a Jekyll prototype a year or so ago. Let’s dust that off. Julian > On Apr 15, 2018, at 19:30, Ted Dunning wrote: > >> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> Hi - >> >> I think that a brand compliant initial

Re: Default webpages for new podlings

A template paragraph of simple HTML seems ideal, and it’s reasonable to expect podlings to create it by the time of their first board report. A full branding-compliant web site is a more complex undertaking, and we the IPMC should not try to hurry that process. The podling's interests are

Re: Redirecting pagespeed.incubator.apache.org to modpagespeed.com

I (as a Druid mentor) suggested the placeholder page, for the exact reasons Greg describes. Short term, I promise, and better than a 404. Julian > On Apr 13, 2018, at 20:15, Greg Stein wrote: > > One step at a time. If they want to throw a single page up *today* rather >

Re: The role of a mentor

Has anyone here taught someone how to fish? (Or how to make cookies, or ski?) Mostly you just stand off, watching what they do. If you see them about to screw up in a big way, step in. Occasionally, offer them hints for how they might do what they’re doing a little bit better. (Not too often,

[DISCUSS] Absent mentors

The incubator has an ongoing problem with lack of mentor engagement. Mentors are a crucial component of the incubation process. Incubation is the time when projects learn the Apache Way, and they cannot learn in a vacuum. I’d like to discuss possible solutions to this problem. I’d like to hear

Re: [VOTE]: Apache HAWQ 2.3.0.0-incubating Release

Yes, https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basic-facts <https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basic-facts> now makes sense. Thanks for updating it, sebb. > On Mar 14, 2018, at 6:15 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 14 March 2018 at 1

Re: [VOTE]: Apache HAWQ 2.3.0.0-incubating Release

The guidance at https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basic-facts is inconsistent with https://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums . The

Re: Self Serve & IPMC Members

It was I who originally raised this issue. I didn’t expect much to be done. I was very pleasantly surprised. Thank you to John Ament, Mark Thomas, Greg Stein and Chris Lambertus (and maybe others I am unaware of) for each picking up the baton and driving this issue to a solution. Julian >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Pinot into Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Ironic that Druid — a similar project — has just entered incubation too. But of course that is not a conflict. Both are great projects. Good luck! Julian > On Mar 9, 2018, at 7:37 PM, Carl Steinbach wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018, 7:29 PM

Re: Podling setup

omas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 09/03/18 07:47, Julian Hyde wrote: >> >> >>> On Mar 8, 2018, at 4:51 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 07/03/18 23:24, Julian Hyde wrote: >>>> I’m a mentor of a new podling,

Re: Podling setup

> On Mar 8, 2018, at 4:51 AM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 07/03/18 23:24, Julian Hyde wrote: >> I’m a mentor of a new podling, Druid. I would like to help them get set up, >> e.g. create mailing lists, create git repos. I tried to use >> htt

Podling setup

I’m a mentor of a new podling, Druid. I would like to help them get set up, e.g. create mailing lists, create git repos. I tried to use https://selfserve.apache.org/ for these, but it only allows officers (i.e. PMC chairs). How is this supposed to work? Is the

Re: Druid 0.12.0 release (pre incubation)

As a mentor of Druid, sounds good to me. It’s good to keep on releasing regularly - the community relies on it. Please mention this in the board report (due in about a week). When will the next release be, and will you be able to make that under the incubator process? Julian > On Mar 2,

[RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Druid into the Apache Incubator

* Julian Hyde * P. Taylor Goetz * Ryan Blue * Steve Blackmon * Suneel Marthi * Ted Dunning * Tom Barber * Willem Jiang Non-binding +1: * Amol Kekre * Anu Engineer * Arpit Agarwal * Ashish * Atul K. Gupta * Bhupesh Chawda * Bolke de Bruin * Chinmay Kolhatkar * Hao Chen * Hugo Lauro * Jordan

[VOTE] Accept Druid into the Apache Incubator

uche...@gmail.com) (Lyft) * Mohamed Slim Bouguerra (slim.bougue...@gmail.com) (Hortonworks) * Nishant Bangarwa (nish...@apache.org) (Hortonworks) * Parag Jain (paragjai...@gmail.com) (Oath) * Roman Leventov (leventov...@gmail.com) (Metamarkets) * Xavier Léauté (xav...@leaute.com) (Confluent) == Sponsors =

Re: [DISCUSS] Druid incubation proposal

have one of the >> following Category A or B licenses: ASL, BSD, CDDL, EPL, MIT, MPL; with one >> exception: the optional Druid MySQL metadata store extension depends on >> MySQL Connector/J, which is GPL licensed. Druid currently packages this as >> a separate download;

Re: [DISCUSS] Druid incubation proposal

in Apache incubation. > Affiliations are listed where relevant. We may seek to add other committers > during incubation; for example, we would want to add any current Druid > committers who express an interest after incubation begins. > > * Charles Allen (char...@allen-net.com) (Snap

Re: question about including website source in release

I agree that standard practice is to not include the site. However, in Calcite we do include the web site (or rather, the markdown files from which the site is generated) since the web site is also our documentation. So, your choice. Our site includes Jekyll template code under MIT license and

Re: [DRAFT] Incubator PMC Board Report - January 2018

t; [ ](annotator) Daniel Gruno >> Comments: >> [ ](annotator) Jim Jagielski >> Comments: >> >> IPMC/Shepherd notes: >> >> >> >> >> BatchEE >> >> BatchEE projects aims to provide a JBatch implement

Re: Giving karma

one in the 'incubator' group can edit the SVN files. > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:43 PM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > >> As a mentor of the Crail podling (and an ASF member) I want to give one of >> the PPMC permission to edit their status file, >>

Giving karma

As a mentor of the Crail podling (and an ASF member) I want to give one of the PPMC permission to edit their status file, http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/crail.xml . How

Incubator status report - Crail

Crail is a new podling, and I am one of its mentors. It was not listed in the template for this month’s report[1] (we are looking into why) so we wrote it in. There is no shepherd assigned. Julian [1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/December2017

Re: Crail project looking for mentors

Great. Please reply to this message when you have a name. I need someone to nag. :) > On Nov 28, 2017, at 10:15 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org > <mailto:jh...@apache.org>>

Re: Crail project looking for mentors

e, which is annoying for everyone. Hope we can move on now and >> start preparing the mailing lists etc.. >> >> -Patrick >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: >>> The vote to accept Crail into the incubator

Re: Crail project looking for mentors

gt; That's awesome, welcome aboard! Let me add you to our slack channel as > well (crail.slack.com). > > -Patrick > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Raphael Bircher > <rbircherapa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Julian >> >> Thanks a load... you save the day! >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Crail into the Apache Incubator

+1 binding Julian On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Kacie Karo wrote: > One > > kacie karo > >> On Oct 26, 2560 BE, at 11:25 AM, Clebert Suconic >> wrote: >> >> apache > > - > To

Re: Crail project looking for mentors

If you’re still looking for mentors, I volunteer. Julian > On Oct 18, 2017, at 8:38 PM, patrick stuedi wrote: > > Hi Von Gosling, > > That's great, we will be more than happy to learn from your > experience. Great work with RocketMQ btw.. > > -Patrick > > On Thu, Oct 19,

Re: [VOTE] Accept Science Data Analytics Platform (SDAP) into Apache Incubator WAS Re: [DISCUSS] Accept Science Data Analytics Platform (SDAP) into Apache Incubator

+1 good luck > On Oct 17, 2017, at 2:14 PM, Tom Barber wrote: > > +1 > > Happy to help out if the vote passes. > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Madhawa Kasun Gunasekara < > madhaw...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Here is my +1 >> >> Thanks, >> Madhawa >> >> Madhawa >>

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Mnemonic project from Incubator

+1 (binding) Good luck! Julian > On Sep 19, 2017, at 1:45 PM, Luke Han wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > > Best Regards! > - > > Luke Han > > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Debo Dutta (dedutta) > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Sent from my

Re: Digests in releases

gt; wrote: > > The checksum is not a tampering countermeasure. > > It is a "mirror ran out of diskpace" or "IP checksums are only 32 bits" > countermeasure. > > > > On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > >

Re: Digests in releases

As security experts, you and I know that. But Joe User maybe only checks one digest. (Aren’t we all Joe User sometimes?) Julian > On Aug 31, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Mike Jumper <mike.jum...@guac-dev.org> wrote: > > On Aug 31, 2017 11:21, "Julian Hyde" <jh...@a

Re: Digests in releases

After downloading artifacts, there are 3 things to check: (1) the download is successful; (2) the artifacts were indeed created by the named author; and (3) the artifacts have not been tampered with. A security expert would know to use the .md5 for (1), the .asc for (2), and the .sha256 or

Digests in releases

What is the correct forum for discussing release distribution policy? Current policy [1] states: Every artifact distributed to the public through Apache channels MUST be accompanied by one file containing an OpenPGP compatible ASCII armored detached signature and another file containing an

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Distributed Release Audit Tool (DRAT)

Shane, Since products != projects, what is the process for getting a product name onto that list[1]? Avatica is a product and not a project; we conducted podling name search a few months ago[2]; the Calcite PMC has made several releases of "Apache Calcite Avatica" and plans at some point to

[RESULT] [IP CLEARANCE] Arrow Plasma Object Store

t piece. Makes sense, thanks. > > >> The commit from which the code was extracted for contribution to >> Apache Arrow is >> >> >> https://github.com/ray-project/ray/commit/b94b4a35e04d8d2c0af4420518a4e9a94c1c9b9f >> >> Thanks, >> Wes >> >&

Re: Urgent: Regarding Java package name change to org.apache.*

It rarely comes down to the IPMC or the Board dictating how a project names its java classes (does anyone recall an instance?), so it’s mainly the project’s discretion. In my opinion, where the project is on its adoption curve is an important consideration. Most projects that enter the

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Arrow Plasma Object Store

My mistake. All 8 contributors are present and correct in the ICLAs file. Julian > On Aug 2, 2017, at 1:37 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > > The plan is for all 8 named contributors to submit ICLAs. > > I understand from Wes that all have submitted ICLAs,

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Arrow Plasma Object Store

to you. Julian > On Aug 2, 2017, at 12:25 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > > Julian, > > How are we verifying distribution rights? The git history doesn't match > the documented history. Are these individuals signing ICLAs? > > John > > O

[IP CLEARANCE] Arrow Plasma Object Store

Apache Arrow is receiving a code for the Plasma Object Store[1]. Please vote to approve this contribution. This is a lazy consensus majority vote, per the IP clearance process[2], open for at least 72 hours. Julian [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/arrow-plasma-object-store.html

[RESULT] [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Calcite - Avatica Go

> On Jul 28, 2017, at 12:19 PM, Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: > > +1 (despite being lazy-consensus because I'm really glad to see this > happening!) > > On 7/28/17 2:22 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: >> Apache Calcite is receiving a code for an Avatica dri

Re: svn commit: r1803434 - /incubator/public/trunk/content/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.xml

This change necessitates a change to section 4 of the template: > Receipt of the software grant form must be acknowledged by an > Officer of the ASF by recording in the correct file (grants.txt for a > License Grant or cclas.txt for a Corporate CLA). needs to be amended to mention iclas.txt.

[IP CLEARANCE] Apache Calcite - Avatica Go

Apache Calcite is receiving a code for an Avatica driver written in Go. See http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/calcite-avatica-go.html and https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1240. Please vote to approve this contribution. This is a lazy consensus majority vote, per the IP

Re: [RESULT][VOTE]: Apache HAWQ 2.2.0.0-incubating Release

Ruilong (and others), If in doubt, look people up at https://people.apache.org/phonebook.html . If a voter’s page has “PMC member of … incubator” then their vote is binding. E.g. https://people.apache.org/phonebook.html?uid=jmclean

Re: [VOTE] Heron to enter Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) > On Jun 16, 2017, at 8:43 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote: > > +1 > > On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 8:28 PM Jacques Nadeau wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On Jun 16, 2017 7:26 PM, "Ashish" wrote: >> >> +1 (non-binding) >> >> On Fri, Jun

Re: Images in source code.

Can someone please log a JIRA case on RAT? As soon as this feature is in a released version of RAT I’ll change our release process to require headers in all images. Julian > On Jun 15, 2017, at 5:13 PM, Felix Meschberger > wrote: > > Here:

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Atlas Project from Incubator

+1 (binding) > On Jun 6, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Chris Douglas wrote: > > +1 (binding) -C > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Suma Shivaprasad wrote: >> Dear Incubator members, >> >> Following the discussion in Atlas community on graduating Apache Atlas

Re: ASF hosted binaries collecting user data without an explicit opt-in

t; > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 7:34 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: >> If the binaries are built from the released source code I don’t think we >> should restrict what the binaries do. > > Well, but that's not how we treat licensing for example. For example > --

Re: ASF hosted binaries collecting user data without an explicit opt-in

If the binaries are built from the released source code I don’t think we should restrict what the binaries do. The question is whether the community is aware of what the code is doing, and considers it to be in the best interests of the project. The answer seems to be yes, and yes. I saw that

Re: [DISCUSS] Migration of Podling Maintenance Tooling to Whimsy

+1 It moves us towards a self-service (dare I say “github-like”) experience for podlings, and that is always good. Furthermore, if there are choices to be made (e.g. svnpubsub vs. CMS) I think the tooling should strongly encourage them to take the “standard” option. Maybe it doesn’t even

Re: Updating PPMC rosters via whimsy

+1 > On May 26, 2017, at 3:17 PM, Carlos Santana wrote: > > +100 to the following simplification: > For that reason, I'd like to make a simplifying assumption: that all mentors > are PPMC members, and all PPMC members are committers. > > - Carlos Santana > @csantanapr >

Re: Thanks for the Talks on YouTube

Following the link from http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/apache-big-data-north-america and http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/apachecon-north-america

Re: [VOTE] Pulsar into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) > On May 17, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Jia Zhai wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 1:11 AM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> -Taylor >> >>> On May 16, 2017, at 10:39 PM, Bryan Call wrote: >>>

Re: Podling release vote terminology

Craig, You seem to imply that things used to be done differently. If so, can you point to process documents or example threads of how things were done differently in the past. Are you proposing merely a change in terminology, or a change in process? The two "votes" are very real, since they have

Re: [VOTE] Superset Proposal for Apache Incubator

& Committer > * Ashutosh Chauhan <hashut...@apache.org> - Mentor & Committer > * Nishant Bangarwa <nbanga...@hortonworks.com> - PPMC & Committer > * Slim Bouguerra <sbougue...@hortonworks.com> - Committer > * Priyank Shah <ps...@hortonworks.com> - Co

Re: [VOTE] Superset Proposal for Apache Incubator

+1 binding > On Apr 25, 2017, at 12:48 PM, moon soo Lee wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:49 AM Ashutosh Chauhan > wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> Thanks, >> Ashutosh >> >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 5:45 AM, Luke Han

Re: Incubator Governance Change

> On Apr 24, 2017, at 11:48 AM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote: > While podlings have an explicit set of mentors, the IPMC as a whole can be > thought of as an informal set of mentors. Reviewing and voting on podling > release candidates is one way for any IPMC member to help a

<    1   2   3   4   >