Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:17 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 2/3/2012 7:06 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: It would be perfectly reasonable to me for the IPMC to find other ways for a PPMC to have binding votes. I don't see a reasonable alternative structure. Feel free to propose one. I thought I

Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:27 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 2/3/2012 7:19 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: On 4 February 2012 01:06, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: The main problem I see, and what Joe seems to complain about a lot, is that mentors seem to fail at mentoring. Creating

Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

On Feb 3, 2012, at 5:57 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 2/3/2012 7:40 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: I thought I did. The proposal that Chris put forth seems to make podlings formal PMCs that report to the board simply so they have authority to vote on releases, add new committers, etc

Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:01 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 2/3/2012 7:47 PM, Ralph Goers wrote Well, to be blunt, that sucks. No. In all reality, it doesn't. Far too many resources were drained in the past five years on a handful of projects which never had a hope of graduating

Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:05 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: On 2/3/2012 7:40 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: My interest goes beyond any of those topics, though. Incubator is very tedious. Very little is resolved. Deck chairs are shuffled. But at the end of the day, projects don't have ownership

Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:28 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: On Feb 3, 2012, at 6:11 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: Your statement above could just as easily be applied to having each podling be a subproject of the IPMC (as it is today), but be given the authority and responsibility

Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

I am +1 to what your proposal does. I am not so fond of the wording of it. I've tried to make changes to eliminate pointing fingers but just couldn't with the last section. I would suggest you take another stab at editing it to: a) make this proposal a general document, not just from you, and

Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

On Feb 4, 2012, at 8:51 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: I see that Ralph already removed the worst of my excesses, and I fixed a few others. Are we good? I'm really not in this to win a fight ( -- or an election --) but rather to help the community reach a consensus by stating a (hopefully)

Re: Earned autonomy

On Feb 5, 2012, at 8:00 PM, Luciano Resende wrote: On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote: I fully agree the current Incubator has its issues, but radically killing it off IMO will also kill off more than just those issues: it will also kill the Incubator community

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache BVal as a TLP

Is this a discussion thread or a vote thread? If it is a vote thread please restart it with [VOTE]. If you want to discuss whether the project should graduate then we can do that. Ralph On Feb 7, 2012, at 3:29 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote: Hi... It has been discussed, since a while,

Re: [VOTE] Apache BVal as a TLP

+1 (binding) Ralph On Feb 8, 2012, at 6:39 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote: Hi... It has been discussed, since a while, about the graduation of Apache BVal, whether to graduate to a TLP or Subproject and whether it is time or not, [1], [2] and [3]. In the past few weeks there has been a

Re: [VOTE] Jukka Zitting for IPMC Chair (was Re: NOMINATIONS for Incubator PMC Chair)

+1 (binding) Ralph On Feb 9, 2012, at 7:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote: Hi Folks, OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the running have

Re: [VOTE] Release jena-tdb-0.9.0-incubating (RC-4)

+1 (binding) Ralph On Feb 24, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: On 24/02/12 14:04, sebb wrote: The directory structures align: /download/jena-tdb-0.9.0-incubating /source-release/jena-tdb-0.9.0-incubating I see the following files (amongst others) in the RC area

Re: [VOTE] Release jena-tdb-0.9.0-incubating (RC-4)

Rats - please ignore my vote. I accidentally +1'd the wrong thread. Ralph On Feb 24, 2012, at 3:47 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: +1 (binding) Ralph On Feb 24, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Andy Seaborne wrote: On 24/02/12 14:04, sebb wrote: The directory structures align: /download/jena-tdb-0.9.0

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator

+1 Ralph On Feb 24, 2012, at 1:34 PM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: This is a call for vote to graduate Sqoop podling from Apache Incubator. Sqoop entered Incubator in June of 2011. Since then it has added three new committers from diverse organizations, added two new PPMC members, and made two

Re: [VOTE] RAT Ready To Graduate As Apache Creadur Top Level Project

+1 (binding) Ralph On Feb 26, 2012, at 8:03 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: The graduation guide[1] recommends that the Rat community demonstrates it's willingness to govern itself through a free VOTE before asking the IPMC to approve graduation. So, here it is :-) See [2] for a draft

Re: Flume status (Was: [Incubator Wiki] Update of March2012 by ArvindPrabhakar)

On Mar 12, 2012, at 1:14 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi, On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Arvind Prabhakar arv...@apache.org wrote: The main reason why we feel it is necessary for us to release from the trunk is because up until now, our trunk contained sources in com.cloudera.flume

Re: [VOTE] Release Flume version 1.1.0-incubating

Just to be clear, although the version number doesn't indicate this the Flume community considers this to be a beta release. Ralph On Mar 19, 2012, at 1:45 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: This is the second incubator release for Apache Flume, version 1.1.0-incubating. *** Please cast your

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.1.0-incubating (rc1)

From what I can tell this is still short 1 IPMC vote. Despite the fact that I disagree with having a beta release that doesn't include some notion of beta in the release number, I will try to find time this weekend to review the release. Ralph On Mar 19, 2012, at 5:46 PM, Arvind Prabhakar

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.1.0-incubating (rc1)

Thanks, Matt. That provides the 3 IPMC votes required. Ralph On Mar 25, 2012, at 3:37 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: Compiled, verified checksums, review notices and spot checked source for licenses. +1 (binding) Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day

Re: [VOTE] CloudStack for Apache Incubator

+1 binding Ralph On Apr 9, 2012, at 6:32 PM, Kevin Kluge wrote: Hi All. I'd like to call for a VOTE for CloudStack to enter the Incubator. The proposal is available at [1] and I have also included it below. Please vote with: +1: accept CloudStack into Incubator +0: don't care -1: do

Re: [VOTE] retire zeta components from incubation

+1 (binding) Ralph On May 3, 2012, at 1:12 AM, Julien Vermillard wrote: Hi, As discussed earlier the Zeta components community has voted to retire the project. Following the retirement guide [1], I now call the Incubator PMC to vote on confirming this decision. This vote is open for the

Re: [VOTE] Let the retired Zeta Components project keep their name

Why does the IPMC need to vote on this? I don't see it as part of the list below of things the trademarks committee requires. Ralph On May 14, 2012, at 5:30 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Hello, Zeta Components has been retired and the committers want to go to github with the project.

Re: June reports in two weeks

Jukka, since the last report I have changed my opinion a bit and recommend you add Flume to the low diversity list. Ralph On May 23, 2012, at 4:28 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi all, There's plenty of time still before the June reports [1] start flowing in. As an early remainder to podlings

Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

Right after I read Jukka's email that started this thread and I posted my reply and discovered to my shock that they had started a graduation vote. I am shocked because I have pointed out repeatedly the project's complete lack of diversity. Virtually all the active PMC members and committers

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 23, 2012, at 10:15 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Right after I read Jukka's email that started this thread and I posted my reply and discovered to my shock that they had started a graduation vote. I am

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 23, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: On May 23, 2012, at 10:15 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Right after I read

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 23, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: On May 23, 2012, at 10:15 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Right after I read

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

needs to remain in the incubator until we develop greater diversity, that's fine too. If we're not ready, we're just not ready. On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote: On May 23, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:36

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 24, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: Hi, On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote: The ONLY issue I see for Flume to graduate is diversity. No one will convince me that the current makeup constitutes diversity of any kind

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 25, 2012, at 2:46 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote: On May 24, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: There are four companies represented in this list: AVG Technologies, Cloudera, CyberAgent

Re: JIRA and communities

On May 25, 2012, at 8:37 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Steve Loughran steve.lough...@gmail.com wrote: On 24 May 2012 06:15, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: I've met other groups of people who like a JIRA centric view of the world. I suspect

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 25, 2012, at 11:03 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: That leaves just me as the only non-Cloudera PPMC member who actively participates and I don't commit code and I've been on the PPMC primarily as a mentor. If you somehow believe that this constitutes diversity than my job as a mentor

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 26, 2012, at 10:11 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote: At this point my recommendations are: 1. Since the PPMC voted to separate being a committer and being a PMC member I would wait a couple of months

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 26, 2012, at 9:29 PM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: Hi Jukka, On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote: IIUC Flume operates under an RTC model where people are not supposed to commit their own changes, which obviously makes the above data less

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

. Roy On May 26, 2012, at 11:44 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: On May 26, 2012, at 9:29 PM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: Hi Jukka, On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote: IIUC Flume operates under an RTC model where people

Re: JIRA and communities

On May 28, 2012, at 6:57 AM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote: -Original Message- From: Benson Margulies [mailto:bimargul...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2012 10:51 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: JIRA and communities So, what message here should the incubator

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Parser

My initial reaction is that there may be some confusion between this project and Commons Configuration, at least from a naming standpoint. However, I don't believe Commons Configuration currently supports this format of configuration. Ralph On May 30, 2012, at 11:18 PM, Seungyoung Kim wrote:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Parser

On May 31, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Greg Stein wrote: On May 31, 2012 5:31 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: ... (that said, I agree: this seems like it should be a proposal to Commons, so we just need to handle that redirection) And I didn't read the proposal closely enough, but took from

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

sure how to vote. Ralph On Jun 5, 2012, at 6:49 AM, Alan Gates wrote: On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Another way of looking at these same statistics: Cloudera - 217 Other - 16

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

on. Patrick On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: The graduation requirements say The project is considered to have a diverse community when it is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote: Based on some digging, I think what you are mostly facing is a battle of perception. As not everyone has read or is privy to the private list discussions, what they see is that you have a standing -1 vote from a mentor who has

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On Jun 5, 2012, at 4:10 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi, On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: I posted an email earlier today where I discussed my confusion over the diversity requirement. I'm not comfortable doing anything without getting some

Re: diversity

: On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: I posted an email earlier today where I discussed my confusion over the diversity requirement. I'm not comfortable doing anything without getting some feedback on whether the diversity requirement, as currently stated on the wiki, is correct

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Flume podling from Apache Incubator

* Mike Percy mpe...@apache.org * Mingjie Laim...@apache.org * Nick Verbeck nerdyn...@apache.org * Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org * Prasad Mujumdarpras...@apache.org * Ralph

Re: [VOTE] Retire AWF from incubation

+1 (binding) Ralph On Jul 4, 2012, at 2:18 PM, Roger Schildmeijer wrote: Hi, The AWF community has voted to retire the project. Following the retirement guide [1], I now call the Incubator PMC to vote on confirming this decision. (Will be open for 72 hours). [ ] +1 Retire the AWF

Re: [VOTE] Accept Apache Streams as an Incubator Project

+1 (binding) Ralph On Nov 14, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote: Given the feedback received so far I think the Streams proposal is in good shape so I am calling for a vote to accept Streams into the Incubator. The proposal is at:

Re: [VOTE] Accept Marmotta into the incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: Hi there, Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta proposal: Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal: [ ] +1 Accept Marmotta into the Apache

Re: What's up with WSRP4J?

That is a very good question. I do know that we did a portal evaluation earlier this year and every vendor was planning on having WSRP 2.0 support during this year. The spec was finally approved this year. I seem to recall the OASIS site had links to the encumbrances. I can't find them now.

Re: Apache JSecurity/Ki rename - please submit suggestions!

On May 19, 2009, at 12:53 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Maarten Bosteels wrote: Hi Les, Is there an entry in TESS that shows us the potential naming conflict ? It could help us understand which names are good candidates. I don't quite understand the problem (IANAL). My apologies if

Re: Apache JSecurity/Ki rename - please submit suggestions!

My recollection of the discussion was that the recommendations where a) don't ask the party that might be infringed on for permission, b) it is OK to wait for the project to wait until they are contacted, if ever, before doing anything. Ironically, shortly before this discussion there was

Re: Apache JSecurity/Ki rename - choose your favorite!

I'd vote +1 on JSecurity if it was on the list and my vote mattered. I've still never gotten an answer why the change is even necessary. I'm not subscribed to Ki Developers so I won't see a reply if it doesn't come back to incubator general. Ralph On May 29, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Les

Re: Wookie IP clearance

I was going to propose that whatever the next project approved for the incubator is that it should be required to be named Foo. Ralph On Jul 22, 2009, at 8:42 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Are we cool with the name 'wookie' as a mark?? On Jul 20, 2009, at 2:43 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: In the

Re: Suspending Projects

I would recommend that the public facing page for the project also be modified since it will still show up in searches. Ralph On Jul 26, 2009, at 10:44 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: This thread really needs to be put to a conclusion as policy and procedure. On the table we have: Suspension

Re: Suspending Projects

On Jul 28, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: I think we need to consider the risk to Apache of leaving the svn repo in a r/o state. According to the XAP status page, http://incubator.apache.org/projects/xap.html the copyright and distribution rights have not been verified, so

Re: Diversity as an insurance policy (Was: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Pivot)

On Aug 4, 2009, at 2:10 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi, On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Bertrand Delacretazbdelacre...@apache.org wrote: In such a case, the key point is, do the people who write the code listen to the community? That's certainly good, but IMHO not really the key point as it

Re: Diversity as an insurance policy (Was: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Pivot)

On Aug 5, 2009, at 2:00 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi, On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Ralph Goersralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Using these projects as an example is perhaps not the best from a community perspective because Ceki has no intention of running them like Apache projects.

Re: Diversity as an insurance policy (Was: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Pivot)

On Aug 5, 2009, at 8:21 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: On Aug 5, 2009, at 2:00 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi, On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Ralph Goersralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Using these projects as an example is perhaps not the best from a community perspective because Ceki has

Re: Diversity as an insurance policy (Was: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Pivot)

On Aug 5, 2009, at 8:40 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi, On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Ralph Goersralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: You won't find the second part solely from the commit log. I would expect mentors to be monitoring the dev list. If it is filled with can you fix this? then

Re: Diversity as an insurance policy (Was: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Pivot)

On Aug 5, 2009, at 9:58 AM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: AFAIK Nowhere in the policy it is stated that committer activity == code commits. Martijn Absolutely right. I'd actually like to see more than 3 people with commit privs (and I think most projects have that). As a mentor I would be

Re: Diversity as an insurance policy (Was: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Pivot)

On Aug 5, 2009, at 2:44 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote: OK we have a similar example here at the ASF - when Craig McC. left Apache Shale it slowly died - and AFAIK become the first project to join the Attic. So Ceki decides to become a Yak farmer in patagonia and maybe the same thing happens to

Re: Diversity as an insurance policy (Was: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Pivot)

On Aug 5, 2009, at 10:15 AM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi, On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Martijn Dashorstmartijn.dasho...@gmail.com wrote: AFAIK Nowhere in the policy it is stated that committer activity == code commits. True, but that's how I interpret it, for reasons stated earlier in

Re: Does an incubation proposal require a codebase?

On Aug 7, 2009, at 2:17 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Bertrand Delacretazbdelacre...@apache.org wrote: I would oppose to a podling with no code base and no @apache.org names in the list of initial committers - the chances of morphing that into a working Apache

Re: Does an incubation proposal require a codebase?

On Aug 7, 2009, at 8:52 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:27 PM, Niall Pembertonniall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Bertrand Delacretazbdelacre...@apache.org wrote: ...I would oppose to a podling with no code base and no @apache.org names

Re: Does an incubation proposal require a codebase?

On Aug 10, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Upayavira wrote: The creation of a podling is heavyweight. Very heavy compared to registering a project with Sourceforge, GitHub or GoogleCode. Because of the effort involved in the creation of a podling, it is natural that the Incubator PMC wants some

Re: Thrift release legal issues

See below. First, this should have been asked on legal-discuss. Second, the answers below are just my opinion. On Aug 16, 2009, at 4:24 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote: I'm trying to coax out a release of Apache Thrift and ran into a few obstacles. Maybe you can offer me a little guidance? First,

Re: Thrift release legal issues

On Aug 16, 2009, at 5:38 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote: On Aug 16, 2009, at 4:24 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote: I've also found that there are 6 individuals listed in the Facebook CCLA who do not have ICLAs with us and have accordingly contacted them as well. Was the Facebook CCLA a software grant and

Re: Making up policy on the fly

On Aug 18, 2009, at 5:13 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote: - Original Message From: Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com To: general@incubator.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 8:00:00 PM Subject: Re: Making up policy on the fly On Aug 18, 2009, at 4:22 PM, Craig L Russell wrote

Re: Making up policy on the fly

On Aug 18, 2009, at 11:34 PM, Janne Jalkanen wrote: I remember when the policy regarding @author tags was set several years ago. Plenty of projects were using them to identify developers. Is this documented anywhere? All I could find was a number of discussions referencing such a

Re: [VOTE] Release Empire-db 2.0.5

On Aug 21, 2009, at 6:05 AM, sebb wrote: On 21/08/2009, Francis De Brabandere franci...@gmail.com wrote: About that assembly issue, running mvn assembly:assembly on the assembly... I don't really think that makes sense. The archive is supposed to contain the *full* source, i.e. whatever

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Aries incubator for Enterprise OSGi

On Sep 5, 2009, at 10:36 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote: Voting against a bunch of people forming a new community here at the ASF is v.disappointing and goes against what IMO the ASF is all about. If the Felix community wants to get involved with their efforts then great, if not then don't try

Re: [VOTE] Accept Aries proposal for incubation

On Sep 15, 2009, at 8:54 AM, Jeremy Hughes wrote: The Aries proposal thread has now gone quiet and we would like to call a vote to accept Aries into the Incubator. There has been some good discussion with a few changes to the proposal including the addition of initial committers, increasing

Re: [VOTE] Accept Taverna into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph On Oct 16, 2014, at 12:42 PM, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote: On 16/10/14 18:47, sebb wrote: Apart from the typo, I thought it was necessary for the VOTE thread to contain the full text of the proposal. This has been the case for (almost) all previous acceptance

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

then I suppose my question can be reduced to: After the voting has concluded with positive result (for entering incubation), when must we migrate the source code to ASF? -- Thanks, Daniel Dekany Wednesday, June 3, 2015, 2:05:57 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: IMO, once the source code

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

I would proceed with the plan that the project will succeed in graduating. Usually project names stay with the ASF. I am not sure what the policy would be for a project that failed to graduate. I would suspect the project could keep it after leaving. However, if the project fails to graduate

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

IMO, once the source code is migrated to the ASF you should not do any more releases outside the ASF. I would attempt to clear up as many IP issues as you can before entering but I believe several projects have resolved their IP issues while in the incubator. In the worst case some code may

Re: Licensing Issue

While this is all true, there is a key point in the policy that should be considered [1]. “Will the majority of users want to use my product without adding the optional components”? So if a Language Module is required and BerkeleyLM is so substandard that no one will really use it, then

Re: [VOTE] Accept Freemarker into Apache Incubator

: Evangelia Dendramis Sponsors Champion Jacopo Cappellato Nominated Mentors • David E. Jones - Apache Member • Jacopo Cappellato - Apache Member • Jean-Frederic Clere - Incubator PMC • Ralph Goers - Incubator PMC • Sergio Fernández - Incubator PMC Sponsoring Entity We

Re: [VOTE] Accept Mysos into the Apache Incubator

+1 Ralph On May 28, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Jake Farrell jfarr...@apache.org wrote: Based on the earlier discussion in thread [1], I would like to call a VOTE to accept Mysos, an Apache Mesos framework for running MySQL instances, as a new Apache Incubator project. The proposal is available

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] HornetQ code grant

Actually, if you look at the CCLA you will see that you can also do a software grant with it. Ralph On Jul 4, 2015, at 11:58 PM, Niclas Hedhman nic...@hedhman.org wrote: AFAIK, a CCLA from RedHat is not the correct agreement. It should have been a Software Grant. CCLA is acknowledgement

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

into incubation if failure is the most probable outcome. Can the requirements for getting out from incubation successfully be quantified? For the kind of project like this? -- Thanks, Daniel Dekany Friday, May 22, 2015, 2:44:03 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: I used to use Apache Velocity

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

I used to use Apache Velocity. However, it hasn’t had a release since 2010 and the overall project activity has been minimal for years. As a consequence of that, and a feature that was missing, I recently switched to using Freemarker for some templating work I needed to do. The only reason I

Re: Wiki access

The userid is RalphGoers. Ralph On Aug 4, 2015, at 5:41 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: For some reason I am not able to edit any pages on the incubator wiki. I could swear I used to be able

Wiki access

For some reason I am not able to edit any pages on the incubator wiki. I could swear I used to be able to do that. Does someone have karma to fix this? Ralph - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org

Re: apache binary distributions

On Aug 5, 2015, at 5:44 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Jochen Theodorou blackd...@gmx.org wrote: It was also mentioned here, that for example publishing snapshot

Re: [VOTE] Accept Eagle into Apache Incubation

+1 (binding) Ralph > On Oct 23, 2015, at 7:11 AM, Manoharan, Arun wrote: > > Hello Everyone, > > Thanks for all the feedback on the Eagle Proposal. > > I would like to call for a [VOTE] on Eagle joining the ASF as an incubation > project. > > The vote is open for 72

Re: Concerning Sentry: A disagreement over the Apache Way and graduation

And I have to disagree with you Joe. To me, a mandatory RTC policy says “we don’t trust anybody”. Sure, it doesn’t discriminate, but it is also a PITA. One project I mentored uses RTC along with ReviewBoard and mandates that you cannot commit your own work and every commit must be formally

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Is there something else going on that I am not aware of? Is someone using undue influence where they shouldn’t be? On the Legal list dealing with hypothetical situations is continually avoided. While a code of conduct for mentors might make sense, penalizing mentors who are trying to educate

Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly

I am in the same boat as Alex with regard to QT, but Apache Pivot also has a similar goal. Ralph > On Sep 7, 2015, at 9:43 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > > Apologies if I’m way off base here as I’m not familiar with Corinthia or > QT Editor. If Corinthia were to develop the

Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly

Licensing is always a thorny issue. In general, http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional says that you can use libraries under licenses such as the LGPL for optional dependencies. This is so that user’s can use your project in

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

Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson <he...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> ... >>>> Binding -1s (4): >>>>Greg Stein >>>>Ralph Goers >>>>Roman Shaposhnik >>>>Konstantin Boudnik ... >>> >>>

Re: Impala commit policy

Virtually any project you look at is going to have portions that are fairly complex and portions that are pretty straightforward. In my opinion the correct approach is to identify the parts of the code that a) seem to be most susceptible to bugs, b) are hard to understand well, or c) where

Re: [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

-1 (binding) I’d like to see the project start with CTR and use RTC only for specific cases (like where tests must be modified, over X (1000 lines?) of code added, etc. Ralph > On Nov 24, 2015, at 2:03 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > > Hi - > > The [DISCUSS] thread has been

Re: [VOTE] Accept Kudu into the Apache Incubator

-1 (binding) I’d like to see the project start with CTR and use RTC only for specific cases (like where tests must be modified, over X (1000 lines?) of code added, etc. I must say I do find the part about achieving quality through automation attractive, but following that up with requiring RTC

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

> On Nov 25, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote: > > Isn't it an issue of scalability? With pre-commit code reviews, typically > the uploader of the code will pick out one or two people to review the code > who know the area well. Or, if no one is picked by the submitter of

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

1. What makes you think all bugs are caught during code reviews (they aren’t)? 2. What makes you think that code reviews after the commit are any less thorough than reviews required before the commit? If you don’t trust your community to do code reviews after you commit then there is a problem

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

Sorry Jim. As an attempt to shut down a thread, this wasn't a very good one. Not a single poster in this thread has a problem with the word, or the concept of, "review". It is the process that is the issue and what the impact of that process is upon a community. Ralph > On Nov 26, 2015, at

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

A combination approach seems like it would be the best to me. Is the process you guys use documented? As I said, the part that bothers me with the way RTC is done in the project I am involved in is that I can’t commit my own stuff. Ralph > On Nov 20, 2015, at 6:09 AM, Jim Jagielski

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

And there is another problem I have. Maybe it isn’t true of all projects, but the one I am involved with says the author can’t commit his own code. So the commit logs will not reflect who actually authored the code but who reviewed it. I could probably tolerate RTC if I had to have the commit

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

; Some projects use the git Signed-off-by field in the commit log to >> differentiate the author from the reviewer. >> >> --Chris Nauroth >> >> >> >> >> On 11/19/15, 10:58 AM, "Ralph Goers" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >

<    1   2   3   >