Trademarks and incubation (was: [DISCUSS] Graduate Apache AGE Incubating as a Top Level Project)

Question: where did the incubation process fail in this case? How can we prevent something like this from happening again? On 2021/12/20 22:50:13 Eya Badal Abdisho wrote: Hello Justin, Thank you for your feedback. Please find more information following: ...snip...> - There are some minor

Re: New project invitations

Craig Russell wrote on 3/21/24 12:20 AM: ...snip... We really can do better, but we have to have better documentation. Some folks have started working on improving the actual emails or links we use for onboarding at various steps of the process. So if we're updating this step, folks might

Re: covid-19 project initiative

Maziar Siami wrote on 2020-3-22 3:03PM EDT: > Hi All, > I am not sure if this email list is the relevant one. But hope it is close > enough. > I believe Apache foundation could launch projects to leverage volunteers and > technology in addressing  covid-19 outbreak.There can be different

How to subscribe (was: Incubator PMC members not subscribed to private list)

Reminder: this Whimsy tool for committers can subscribe/unsubscribe you from almost any list that you're allowed to subscribe to (i.e. including PPMC lists or private@ if you have permissions for them) https://whimsy.apache.org/committers/subscribe Justin Mclean wrote on 2020-1-9 7:47PM EST: >

Re: [MENTORS] Board report submitted, a few missing mentor sign-offs

Related question: the incubator report says "The board has motions for the following: Apache Rya, Apache SINGA" but I don't see the vote for SINGA having completed or any note to the board to add a resolution. Given the late timing, I'd personally suggest adding the SINGA resolution for next

Re: Board@ subscriptions

To make Dave's answer specific to your question: Yes, as chair of Apache Drat (a TLP) you are expected to follow board@ "to ensure that [you] are aware of Foundation level issues that may affect their project": https://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair Podling or IPMC folk do *not* need to

Re: Generating + formatting the Board report from the website?

Bertrand Delacretaz wrote on 5/22/19 6:09 AM: > On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 11:46 AM Justin Mclean > wrote: >> ...It’s still unclear to me how Whimsy will render this, guess we find out >> when we submit it?.. > > I think the core of the Board agenda is the text file in svn, that's > what needs to

Re: Generating + formatting the Board report from the website?

Justin Mclean wrote on 5/20/19 9:04 AM: ...snip...>> Or we can improve the script or maybe even move to Markdown for the >> input to have more control, if you think this would help. > > Markdown might help the board in reviews (but not 100% sure about that), but > it would be more work for the

Re: board report duplication

Sam Ruby wrote on 4/12/19 9:48 PM: > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 2:42 PM Sam Ruby wrote: >> >> 3) Somebody uses the whimsy board agenda tool to update the incubator >> report, and it dutifully strips out the previous report (up to said >> row of dashes) an inserts a new report. > > Here is the

USPTO links (was: [Cava] Suitable name search - choosing a name)

Kevin A. McGrail wrote on 2/28/19 7:58 PM: ...snip... > Note: From the USPTO TESS: "*BAVA*" is an Italian word that means > "slobber" or "drool".  Not sure if this will permalink: > http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc=4804:rx7o71.2.7 No, most links from the USPTO website don't work,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Changing requirements for IPMC

Great ideas, thanks Justin! Justin Mclean wrote on 11/6/18 3:20 AM: > Hi, > > I looked at the board resolution for the creation of the IPMC [1] and it says > nothing about how IPMC members should be added so from that I take it that > the IPMC can decide how it wants to do that. The IPMC is a

Re: How widely read is the incubator report?

Justin Mclean wrote on 11/2/18 6:38 PM: > Hi, > > I would guess goes that PPMC that report for that month may read it or > possibly only check their bit? I read the entire report every month. Then again, I'm a director so I'm supposed to. 8-) I'd bet most PPMC members never read the report

[jira] [Created] (INCUBATOR-223) Website build fails with jbake 2.6.2

Shane Curcuru created INCUBATOR-223: --- Summary: Website build fails with jbake 2.6.2 Key: INCUBATOR-223 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-223 Project: Incubator Issue

Re: Request for advice: name search for subproject

Kenneth Knowles wrote on 10/10/18 11:13 PM: > Hello! > > Apache Beam [1] is welcoming a donation [2] of the Euphoria DSL [3]. As PMC > chair I am doing IP clearance. I would like advice on the process for a > name/trademark search for a subproject like this. Is this the right venue > to ask? Can

Re: [PROPOSAL] Zipkin for Apache Incubator

Adrian Cole wrote on 8/17/18 5:29 AM: > I would like to propose Zipkin as an Apache Incubator project. > > The text of the proposal can be found below as well as on the Incubator wiki: > > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ZipkinProposal Glad to see this come through! One thing I'd like to

Re: Help wanted about the license of the theme for building SkyWalking's website.

Can you provide a link to the specific theme? On first look, I don't see how this can be appropriate for building any major part of an Apache project's web presence. The licenses there would seem to prevent other people from forking any of the website, which would not be appropriate. For

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

Jim Jagielski wrote on 4/1/18 10:19 AM: > Would it be possible to generate a short list of all current > mentors for all current podlings to see how many podlings > each mentor is signed up for? That would be a good metric > to know. Presuming podlings.xml is kept updated:

Re: Thoughts on Trademarks / Existing Domains on Podling Proposals / Reports

Thanks for the excellent question and Mark's thoughtful replies. Mark Thomas wrote on 2/13/18 4:27 AM: > On 12/02/18 23:24, Dave Fisher wrote: >> Hi - >> >> I think that the Incubator should adjust the proposal process when a project >> comes in that has registered trademarks. >> >> There are a

Re: Update README for retired podlings?

Dave Fisher wrote on 11/2/17 11:13 PM: >> On Nov 2, 2017, at 7:06 PM, John D. Ament wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 6:17 PM Dave Fisher wrote: > On Nov 2, 2017, at 3:08 PM, sebb wrote: > On 2 November 2017 at 21:07, Dave

Re: [DISCUSS] Proposed resolution to graduate the PredictionIO podling

Andrew Purtell wrote on 10/3/17 5:59 PM: > I think we can proceed to a vote as soon as Shane confirms we are good on > the PredictionIO trademark transfer. Should we ping him? The trademark assignment is signed, so you're all set to vote for graduation recommendation! Note that the ownership of

Re: [PROPOSAL] PageSpeed

Jukka Zitting wrote on 9/26/17 10:23 AM: > Let's start a VOTE tomorrow if nobody has big concerns or issued they'd > want to clarify before the vote. > > The way I see it, the biggest items to look at during incubation is > completing the transition from a Google-driven project to an independent,

Re: Podlings & Apache Project Maturity Model (was RE: [DISCUSS] Graduate Apache RocketMQ from podling to TLP)

Bertrand Delacretaz wrote on 9/4/17 4:54 AM: > Hi John, > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 9:11 PM, John D. Ament wrote: >> ...Its unfair for us to put some stake in the ground expecting podlings to >> match up 100% on the questions. Many of the questions are subjective - is >>

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

Greg Stein wrote on 8/10/17 8:44 AM: > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:46 AM, Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote: > >> (note mixed private/public lists) ...snip... >> - Has the Apache Creadur project been consulted about the new project >> proposal, and in partic

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

ean that we could prevent everyone from having a software product called Rat - only that they can't have a Rat software that would *be likely to confuse users as to the source of the product*. Does that make sense? - Shane > > John > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 7:46 AM Shane Curcu

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

(note mixed private/public lists) General questions, since... we haven't actually had any discussion yet. - Is there a particular hurry to bring this to pTLP faster than the traditional general@incubator discussion period is? - Has the Apache Creadur project been consulted about the new project

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

John D. Ament wrote on 8/4/17 7:59 AM: > On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 7:17 AM Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote: ...snip... >> - Other reverse domain names *really* should change to org.apache; >> otherwise it's just confusing. >> >> > Agreed. The one cave

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

Andy Seaborne wrote on 8/4/17 5:00 AM: > On 03/08/17 23:20, John D. Ament wrote: >> Which must's do you see greg? >> >> On Aug 3, 2017 1:09 PM, "Greg Trasuk" wrote: >> >>> Does this actually need to be policy? What’s the harm to the foundation >>> if a project continues

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

Alex Harui wrote on 8/3/17 10:37 AM: > From the peanut gallery: > > Does the PPMC get to decide what constitutes a "very good reason" or does > the IPMC and after graduation, the board? > > Flex has not changed its packages in the 5 years at Apache. We felt > backward compatibility was and is a

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

John D. Ament wrote on 8/2/17 9:13 PM: > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 8:54 PM Roman Shaposhnik > wrote: > >> On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Abhishek Tiwari wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> In regards to the recently incubated project - Gobblin, we were wondering >>>

Re: ZeroMQ licensing in Apache MXNet

Greg Stein wrote on 7/6/17 4:01 AM: > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Henri Yandell wrote: >> ... > >> I'd like to ask on legal-discuss@ for an exception (one year?) to continue >> using ZeroMQ, with prominent documentation, in MXNet given the trend >> towards MPL 2.0. >> > >

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

Roman Shaposhnik wrote on 6/7/17 4:20 PM: > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> On 07/06/17 17:53, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 8:32 AM, Sean Busbey wrote: On 2017-06-06 11:59 (-0500), Roman Shaposhnik

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

While there may be technical issues out there, the policy issues can have time for a thorough discussion before we make policy updates. Alex Harui wrote on 6/5/17 11:25 PM: > Is the use of Google Analytics also prohibited by #4? That sounds like a different issue, unless a project is shipping

Re: Images in source code.

Mike Drob wrote on 6/4/17 3:12 PM: > Project logos are Apache Licensed, but cannot be used for "any purpose" I > thought? They're specifically called out and most uses of trademark logos > need to be approved by VP Brand. Correct, although not quite exact. The Apache license itself explicitly

Re: My Slides from... any ApacheCon/BigData talks

John D. Ament wrote on 5/18/17 11:12 AM: > All, > > I've had a couple of people ask where my slides are for the talk I gave > this week at Apachecon. I also expect the video to be published soon. The > slide deck can be found at https://s.apache.org/jda_acna_2017 Reminder: speakers can upload

Re: Incubator Governance Change

Pat Ferrel wrote on 4/22/17 11:46 AM: > Probably the wrong place for this but… > > What do people think about a governance change for approving releases > through the IPMC to wit: > > A week of no vote activity over the release proposal of a podling > should be considered a passing vote. In

Re: Podling Press Kit

Good questions. My thoughts: Daniel Dekany wrote on 4/14/17 5:32 AM: > The page says that the "Official Incubator Logo" "is to be used on ALL > podling pages during the incubation process". But I guess the intent > was to allow using the "Red-On-White Version of Logo" or > "Black-On-White

Re: Help with Dependency Licensing

Nick Couchman wrote on 4/11/17 10:26 AM: > Hello, everyone,I'm currently working on the Guacamole incubator > project, and am developing an extension for the project that has > dependencies on binaries (JARs via Maven) that are licensed under > Category-X licenses. We've already determined that

Re: Revisit policy that all IPMC members have commit privs to all incubator repositories.

John D. Ament wrote on 4/6/17 6:57 AM: > This solution describes one of the many reasons I feel the incubator itself > is broken. We're trying to rewrite policy, as a means to work around some > awkward setup sitting around, instead of just treating podlings as regular > projects, with some

Re: Where to edit a podling's data for whimsey?

Stack wrote on 3/24/17 6:18 PM: > I am having trouble finding where to edit to fix a podling's whimsey view? > Pointers appreciated. > Thanks, > St.Ack Which specific data and/or which Whimsy URL do you need to update? Whimsy URLs that might be relevant: https://whimsy.apache.org/public/

Re: New Incubator Logo Selection Results

Looks amazeballs great! John D. Ament wrote on 3/17/17 8:53 PM: > Yeah, sorry about that. Was going to send out more direct links when > I had the website updates almost ready. Anyways here they are. > > 1. The new logo, in a more web-ready format: >

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

John D. Ament wrote on 1/24/17 8:15 PM: > All, > > The Incubator PMC has received feedback from the board that changes may > need to be made to the structure of our report. Specifically, there is > confusion from the board members over how podlings get classified. There > is also a request to

Re: Trademark registration

Legally the ASF could register the trademarks for podlings, once we have the source code in our repo, but as a public charity it's not appropriate for us to do so given the cost and fact that a podling may fail to graduate[1]. Some podlings coming from companies have existing registrations, which

Re: [DISCUSS] Documentation

Bertrand Delacretaz wrote on 11/11/16 9:37 AM: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 8:46 AM, Gunnar Tapper > wrote: >> ...Talking with other contributors, there's a clear preference to use Apache >> OpenOffice for documentation > > *for some people*, right? I think many of us

Re: [DISCUSS] China Contribution.

(note mixed private/public lists) Julian Hyde wrote on 11/11/16 8:31 AM: > I like the way that Reynold is coming at this. > > I am aware of the rule mandating English for discussions. But in the > interests of having no more rules than are strictly necessary, is it > not sufficient to tell PMCs

Re: [Proposal] Move Wiki Access Requests somewhere

Are most requesters already committers, or no? If so, then *cough* whimsy tool *cough*. That's a place we can create simple AUTH'd request tools that channelize things; even as a front end, it would ensure the requests have a specific which-wiki, who is the username, etc. that you don't always

Re: MySQL FOSS License Exception

Donald Szeto wrote on 9/29/16 6:13 PM: > Hi all, > > I have searched around the Internet and haven't seen this discussed > (appreciate pointers if I missed any existing discussion). > > The exception: https://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/foss-exception/ > > I am curious how Apache view

Re: Netbeans expectations (Was: Re: ASF doing too much? (Was: Re: TAC))

(Please note the mixed public/private lists) As a little bit of context: NetBeans is not only a large project with a complex history, community, and infrastructure, but it's also coming at a time when the ASF is trying to improve our internal operations, infrastructure team and systems, and our

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

Geertjan Wielenga wrote on 9/25/16 6:05 PM: > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Rich Bowen wrote: > > >> Having a third party run a service under an Apache brand requires working >> with VP Brand. > > > Indeed, this is something we're going to need to do. I.e., there will be > existing

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

toki wrote on 9/24/16 8:04 PM: > On 22/09/2016 05:18, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >> had a non-trivial amount of commits to then Sun NetBeans between 2002-2008. >> He then drifted away from the >> project but would be interested, potentially, re-engaging. > > Is it possible to create a "master list'

Re: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings

Excellent cliff notes, and I'm really glad to see us surfacing the issues - and costs - of incubating such a large podling. Question: do you have a rough forecast of how long this expense/extra infra burden will last? I.e. is this likely something we'll bear for 3-4 years and then we'll have

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Good questions all. Emilian Bold wrote on 9/24/16 5:18 AM: > I assume there is a reason the list is called initial. It doesn't have to > be perfect. Correct. The whole point of Incubation at Apache is to show that the community can learn to self-govern by following Apache processes - and a key

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Jochen Wiedmann wrote on 9/22/16 1:43 AM: > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik > wrote: > >> Still, the question remain -- for somebody like that, what would be a >> criteria >> to be added as a committer after the project enters incubation? > > Projects

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Mitch Claborn wrote on 9/15/16 11:07 AM: > I'm very new in this type of thing. I have zero experience with ASF, > etc, so if this is out of line, please forgive and I'll keep silent. > > I've seen a lot of discussion about the HOW in terms of moving NetBeans > to the Apache project, but not

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

David Nalley wrote on 9/15/16 11:28 AM: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:15 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > wrote: >> Hi Incubator PMC, >> >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Geertjan Wielenga >> wrote: >>> ...

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Greg Stein wrote on 9/14/16 7:40 PM: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote: >> ... > >>>> I think the question is more along the lines of what else would be >>>> required to produce a "canonical&

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Trying to answer two questions: Geertjan Wielenga wrote on 9/14/16 3:49 PM: > I can't wait for that to happen! In the meantime, can we call NetBeans by > its real name: NetBeans, with an uppercase N and an uppercase B? Shall we > all start maintaining that, i.e., using the correct name, which is

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal

Given the historical difficulty in securing usable Java-related TCK licenses from Oracle, will that be an issue in attracting long-term contributors to the project in the future? A number of existing Apache projects have noted that lack of proper and formal access to TCKs is an issue for some of

Re: Dual-licensed logo PNG (CC-BY 3.0, LGPL 3.0)? [TAVERNA]

Indeed, I find it wholly unthinkable that we'd include any LGPL bits in an Apache product release, even if it's an ambiguous choice of licenses. There is no ambiguity in what types of licenses are allowed in Apache releases. The only way to do this (IMO, I'm not VP, Legal) is to make clear that

Re: Ease of release process and exit criteria

Bertrand Delacretaz wrote on 8/19/16 5:57 AM: > Hi Mark, > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> ...I'm thinking of a graduation criteria long the lines of: >> "Is the release process clearly documented to the point that someone new >> to the project could

Re: Notes on branding

John D. Ament wrote on 6/29/16 7:36 AM: > Hey guys > > I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues. > Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were not > within branding requirements. > > I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting

Re: [VOTE] $podling.apache.org is the same as $podling.incubator.apache.org

John D. Ament wrote on 6/29/16 9:21 AM: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 9:18 AM Justin Mclean > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >>> The presence of the word "incubator" in the URL is deliberate: it alerts >> users >>> that a podling is incubating. I'd feel better about this proposal if

Re: [DISCUSS] Pirk Incubation Proposal

Certainly sounds like an interesting project. One thing to think about will be ensuring you can find sufficent datasets and testsets under appropriate licenses so any project participant can run tests against a realistic scenario. Joe Witt wrote on 6/7/16 11:25 AM: > Benjamin, > > The correct

Re: What committers need to know about IP hygiene

Jignesh Patel wrote on 6/1/16 6:42 PM: > Thanks Julian! > > This is very helpful and I’d like to suggest a perhaps having a good > “default” policy in place that all incubators inherit on inception. > They may choose to change the default if needed, but this approach > installs some rail guards

Re: [VOTE] Accept Pony Mail into the Apache Incubator

VocalIQ Ltd > Richard Bowen - Redhat, inc. > Ulises Beresi - Datastax, inc. > David P Kendal - Quenda IvS > Francesco Chicchiriccò - Tirasa S.r.l. > Sam Ruby - IBM > Shane Curcuru - IBM(?) > Jim Jagielski - Capital One Please note I will (very, very soon) be i

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

Gino Bustelo wrote on 5/19/16 12:30 PM: ... > In Toree we have an LGPL dependency that is not a simple rip an replace. > The library is JeroMQ and it is a JVM binding to 0MQ. This is THE protocol > layer used in Jupyter between clients and kernels (Toree serves as a > Jupyter kernel). Over the

Re: The new project site is up!

(Please note mix of public/private lists) Daniel Ruggeri wrote on 5/17/16 7:48 AM: > On 5/16/2016 8:57 PM, Mike Jumper wrote: Also, I've been beaten into submission... erm, I mean... TRAINED to look for trademarks. I haven't dug through the archives yet to know if this was

Re: Throwing my hat in the ring

drugg...@primary.net wrote on 5/14/16 8:18 PM: > Hi, all; > I've been having a lot of great F2F talks the past few days at the con > and Marvin has talked me into throwing my hat in the ring to help with > the incubator project. So, yeah - I'm game to help where I can (and by > sending this email,

Re: In-flight release in Incubator

Chris Riccomini wrote on 5/5/16 6:26 PM: > Hey all, > > Airflow was in the middle of a release prior to joining Apache Incubator, > and had several RCs out. The release has already been delayed by several > weeks due to bugs we've discovered. We don't want to tie this release to > the full-blown

Re: Preferred name for package distributions

(bcc: trademarks@ so we can document recommendation at stable URL) Thanks for the commentary and excellent pulling together of different information on this question! The details of trademarks are more applicable to project homepages, download pages, and the info or about blurbs that various

Re: [LAZY] Simplify Champion role

Marvin Humphrey wrote on 3/31/16 10:44 AM: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 3:54 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > wrote: > >> As for the patch I suggest a slightly expanded definition of Champion, >> "A Member of the Apache Software Foundation who supports a Candidate's >> application

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

Roman Shaposhnik wrote on 3/22/16 4:56 PM: > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: >> If you want to simplify policy, get rid of the champion. >> Or rather, reduce the champion’s role to nominating a project for incubation. >> Once the project has entered

Re: Hosting links to pre-Apache releases

Frank McQuillan wrote on 3/14/16 6:49 PM: > Good day, > > We have moved the Apache MADlib (incubating) web site to ASF infra at > http://madlib.incubator.apache.org/ > > However there is remaining a download page for pre-ASF releases on the old > infra at > http://madlib.net/download/ > > Is it

Re: Making license adjustment tools publicly available

Christopher wrote on 2/4/16 7:25 PM: > It might be relevant that that both of those tools appear to be licensed > under ASL 2.0, which explicitly permits redistribution (presumably outside > the private area?). I would think it confusing to have an open source > license on software which is

Re: Request for advice on code donation

Alex has it right, and it's important to remember that the ASF never asks for copyright assignment of code; we only ask for an SGA grant or a voluntary submission from a contributor of ICLA signer. We only want a license to be able to ship the eventual Apache project under the Apache License

Re: Milagro trademark

Alex Harui wrote on 1/16/16 12:59 AM: > I would recommend asking this on trademarks@a.o. Correct, someone associated with the podling please gather all the information and ask what you need there (which is privately archived). > > I would also recommend two separate transactions. IIRC, the SGA

Re: [PODLINGNAMESEARCH] Tempo - will there be issues using this name?

(note mixed public/private lists) Thanks. The ASF has slightly different criteria for a name search than most software vendors, so this bears discussion. If someone could forward brief details of the proposed podling, what company is donating it, and any other name search details to the

Re: Incubator mail archives lagging badly

Mike Percy wrote on 11/20/15 1:55 PM: > Is the ASF mail archive webapp OSS? I wonder how hard it would be to make a > couple minor usability improvements. Of course it is! It's just an httpd module, actually, which (in theory) makes install/maintenance really simple, basically pointing it at a

Re: [DISCUSS] OpenMiracl for Incubation

Marvin Humphrey wrote on 11/11/15 12:42 AM: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Nick Kew wrote: > >>> The ASF project called OpenMiracl and Certivox/MIRACL continuing to use the >>> MIRACL mark would seem to muddy the water between the two. Would this not >>> disadvantage others

Re: [DISCUSS] OpenMiracl for Incubation

Marvin Humphrey wrote on 11/13/15 9:27 AM: > Hello, Brian, > > Thanks for collaborating with Nick and bringing this proposal to us! > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Brian Spector > wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> among cryptographers in the embedded / IoT space, the

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Daniel Gruno wrote on 10/9/15 3:18 PM: > On 10/09/2015 08:02 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: ...Furthermore, I would like to

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Daniel Gruno wrote on 10/9/15 11:07 AM: > 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

Re: September 2015 Report

On 8/30/15 9:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote: I remember asking about public vs private board reporting in the past. I'm curious what you have to report that is private (since the final report does become public record). Correct: board reports become public record when posted, typically the

Re: apache binary distributions

...@gmail.com Subject: Re: apache binary distributions Again mixed. Let's substitute a real case. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 28, 2015, at 6:21 AM, Shane Curcuru a...@shanecurcuru.org wrote: (Please note mixed private/public lists) On 8/25/15 5:17 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote: [ ... ] package-name

Re: apache binary distributions

(Please note mixed private/public lists) On 8/25/15 5:17 PM, Stephen Connolly wrote: So there is - to my mind - the obvious stuff: 1. The package description should ACK our marks. End of Story there. 2. The package description should call out those cases where there are significant

Re: apache binary distributions

On 8/16/15 9:05 PM, David Nalley wrote: On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: The Hadoop PMC is

Re: What is the legal basis for enforcing release policies at ASF?

On 8/16/15 4:25 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Shane Curcuru a...@shanecurcuru.org wrote: On 8/7/15 7:53 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: Bill, So I can release Niclas Hadoop platform, based on Apache Hadoop ?? I thought the discussion a few years ago

Re: What is the legal basis for enforcing release policies at ASF?

On 8/7/15 7:53 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: Bill, So I can release Niclas Hadoop platform, based on Apache Hadoop ?? I thought the discussion a few years ago was that this was misleading... No, you cannot. See our actual trademark policy: https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/faq/#products

Re: apache binary distributions

On 8/6/15 4:29 AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote: Am 06.08.2015 08:22, schrieb Niclas Hedhman: On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: I honestly see no problem with that, again provided that the artifact can NOT be confused with the one coming from Apache

Re: apache binary distributions - Apache policies

On 8/9/15 9:37 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: The question is: do we have ASF-wide trademark guidelines or do we allow each PMC to make those as they go. Um, yes, we do: https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

On 6/2/15 8:02 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: I would proceed with the plan that the project will succeed in graduating. +1. Focus on the positive, and finding new community contributors. Trying to incubate while regularly talking about well, if we don't make it, we're going to leave and do X is not a

Re: [DRAFT] May 2015 Board Report

On 5/15/15 11:51 AM, John D. Ament wrote: On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 11:20 AM Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote: ... I am encouraged by increasing feedback on the draft report. I would be further encouraged if more people took it to the next level and fixed the problems they see!

Re: [DISCUSS] Whimsy PMC

On 4/27/15 10:05 PM, Greg Stein wrote: On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) ross.gard...@microsoft.com wrote: It's a tough one. We could be setting a precedence here that we absolutely do not want to set. On the other hand, it's problematic (not to mention simply

Re: [DISCUSS] Whimsy PMC

On 4/23/15 5:41 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: Infra already supports Whimsy so having a TLP is irrelevant in that respect (although on reason Sam is doing this is because infra expressed a concern about maintaining a service that only had Sam working on it). To be clear: is the

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

This is obviously a question for the new podling's PPMC and the existing Groovy community mailing lists to decide, but in most other situations auto-subscribing people to a new list is usually a bad idea. I would definitely give people plenty of notice and clear instructions on how to unsubscribe

Re: Do we need @ASFIncubator ?

On 3/23/15 7:58 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: I would *really* prefer if run it via twitterdeck. Managing group accounts that way is WAY better than sharing credentials. I'm enjoying this with @TheASF right now and I think this way needs to be promoted for all the @ASFxxx accounts. +1 I would

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy Incubation proposal

On 3/17/15 12:41 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Shane Curcuru a...@shanecurcuru.org wrote: On 3/11/15 4:20 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: Great initiative! Just one question: I don't see anything related to the groovy name and possible trademark in the proposal

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy Incubation proposal

On 3/11/15 4:20 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: Great initiative! Just one question: I don't see anything related to the groovy name and possible trademark in the proposal. Does Pivotal have any claims to the name groovy, and if so are those claims transferred to the ASF? Good point. Just from

Re: Soliciting feedback for a detailed pTLP policy document

On 3/4/15 1:41 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Doug Cutting cutt...@apache.org mailto:cutt...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org mailto:r...@apache.org wrote: ... As a director, I still don't think the

Re: Podling Name Searches

Yes, you still need to do a podling name search. Hopefully that will show that the existing name is already good to start with and doesn't conflict with other, pre-existing similar software products. If the community intends to keep the name, we need a clear donation of the trademark itself from

Re: What is The Apache Way?

Dear David: I would *love* to see you propose whatever set of requirements that ASF infra as a service sees as appropriate for our projects, given our history, budget, and a view to ensuring reliable service for the future. Then, include a clear list of bullet points which should go into the

  1   2   >