Re: New challenges (Was: NOMINATIONS for Incubator PMC Chair)

[Karl Wright]

Congratulations, Jukka!  You've done a fantastic job!

Karl

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jukka Zitting  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Jukka Zitting  
> wrote:
>> Finally, if elected (and assuming the IPMC still exists), I'd serve
>> for at most two years before calling for a re-election, or possibly
>> much less if I don't find enough free cycles to perform the duty as
>> well as it should.
>
> As already mentioned on private@ earlier, this time is now approaching
> due to a change I didn't yet foresee in February: We're expecting our
> first baby to be born in December. :-)
>
> In practice this means that the amount of time and energy I have for
> the Incubator has unfortunately already started decreasing (we're
> buying a new home and moving back to Finland at least for a while) and
> will likely drop close to zero in December. Thus it is time to start
> considering the election of a new PMC chair for the Incubator.
>
> Before calling for an election vote I'd like to open the discussion
> for nominations and more generic thoughts about the future of the
> Incubator. In the past few quarters we've done a reasonably good job
> on improving the flow of the Incubator and getting many troubled or
> otherwise stuck podlings moving forward again. However, there's still
> a lot that could be done. What do you think the Incubator should be
> like?
>
> Just like I've carved the IPMC chair role to a rather activist form
> that seems to have helped address the most pressing issues we had
> earlier this year, I would expect the next IPMC chair to make the role
> their own. How do you see that and the other Incubator roles, IPMC
> member, mentor, champion, shepherd, etc., evolving?
>
> Please share your thoughts on the future of the Incubator and nominate
> people you think could best help us reach that vision!
>
> Let's leave the discussion open for at least a few weeks before
> conducting the election later this month. That should give us a
> resolution to change the IPMC chair in time for the November board
> meeting, and a chance for me to still work together with the elected
> new chair during November to make sure that the transition goes
> smoothly.
>
> PS. Even though this is a personnel issue, I don't see any particular
> reason for at least all of this discussion to happen on private@. Feel
> free to use private@ for parts of the discussion if appropriate.
>
> PPS. It would be nice if we could use Apache Steve for the election. 
> Volunteers?
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

Answering on Grant's behalf, the ManifoldCF artifact contains both
source and binary, and the KEYS and CHANGES.txt files are within the
artifact, as seems to be standard Apache practice.  You just need to
untar/unzip it.

Karl

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> Is this a source or binary release? How are you guys making the release? 
> Using Ant or Maven?
>
> Can you guys provide a KEYS and CHANGES.txt file as part of the release 
> artifacts?
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> On Jan 6, 2011, at 5:12 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>
>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Grant
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

I am happy to provide clear-text versions of KEYS and CHANGES.txt if
that is what you require.  I've just never seen any other Apache
project that did that.

As for whether there should be separate source and binary
distributions, bear in mind that a binary-only distribution of
ManifoldCF makes little sense.  ManifoldCF is unusual in that it
distributes a number of connectors which require third-party libraries
in order to compile.  We do not distribute those libraries for
licensing reasons.  Conditional compilation is used to build those
connectors for which you supply the right bits.  The binary part thus
includes only the framework, and those connectors which depend only on
open-source code.  This is relatively limited but makes it faster and
easier for someone to start things up right out of the box.

So, effectively, you are asking us to not have a binary distribution
in order to save on space.  Is this a firm request, or is this just
unhappiness at the download time?  FWIW, I personally don't think such
a build will save a great deal tar/zip space, but I can certainly
check and get back to you.

Karl


On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Karl,
>
> On Jan 6, 2011, at 7:14 AM, Karl Wright wrote:
>
>> Answering on Grant's behalf, the ManifoldCF artifact contains both
>> source and binary, and the KEYS and CHANGES.txt files are within the
>> artifact, as seems to be standard Apache practice.
>
> Well I won't say it's standard Apache practice in my experience. I've made 
> probably over a dozen releases in about 3+ different Apache projects so far 
> (Nutch, Tika, SIS) and I've always put out a plain-text version of 
> CHANGES.txt and KEYS alongside the release artifacts. The advantage of doing 
> so is that I don't have to download a 140 MB file before I can check what 
> changes are part of the release.
>
> Also one of the things that Clutch checks in the Incubator is that there is a 
> KEYS file in the distribution area, separate of the release artifacts. So, I 
> would say it should be there.
>
>>  You just need to
>> untar/unzip it.
>
> Thanks for the pointer. I'd like to see the source and binary tarballs 
> separated. Strictly speaking, you really only need a source release, but it's 
> up to you guys I think if you want to provide a binary one too. The advantage 
> is that the source release is likely much smaller I'm guessing than the 
> binary.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi Grant,
>>>
>>> Is this a source or binary release? How are you guys making the release? 
>>> Using Ant or Maven?
>>>
>>> Can you guys provide a KEYS and CHANGES.txt file as part of the release 
>>> artifacts?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> On Jan 6, 2011, at 5:12 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>>>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>>>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Grant
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ++
>>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>>> Senior Computer Scientist
>>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
>>> Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov
>>> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>>> ++
>>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
>>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>>> ++
>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The download size of sources alone is about 32M for each .zip/.tar.gz.

I can't upload CHANGES.txt or KEYS to people.apache.org right now
because of a firewall restriction, so I've attached the files for your
convenience.

Karl


On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> I am happy to provide clear-text versions of KEYS and CHANGES.txt if
> that is what you require.  I've just never seen any other Apache
> project that did that.
>
> As for whether there should be separate source and binary
> distributions, bear in mind that a binary-only distribution of
> ManifoldCF makes little sense.  ManifoldCF is unusual in that it
> distributes a number of connectors which require third-party libraries
> in order to compile.  We do not distribute those libraries for
> licensing reasons.  Conditional compilation is used to build those
> connectors for which you supply the right bits.  The binary part thus
> includes only the framework, and those connectors which depend only on
> open-source code.  This is relatively limited but makes it faster and
> easier for someone to start things up right out of the box.
>
> So, effectively, you are asking us to not have a binary distribution
> in order to save on space.  Is this a firm request, or is this just
> unhappiness at the download time?  FWIW, I personally don't think such
> a build will save a great deal tar/zip space, but I can certainly
> check and get back to you.
>
> Karl
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>  wrote:
>> Hi Karl,
>>
>> On Jan 6, 2011, at 7:14 AM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>
>>> Answering on Grant's behalf, the ManifoldCF artifact contains both
>>> source and binary, and the KEYS and CHANGES.txt files are within the
>>> artifact, as seems to be standard Apache practice.
>>
>> Well I won't say it's standard Apache practice in my experience. I've made 
>> probably over a dozen releases in about 3+ different Apache projects so far 
>> (Nutch, Tika, SIS) and I've always put out a plain-text version of 
>> CHANGES.txt and KEYS alongside the release artifacts. The advantage of doing 
>> so is that I don't have to download a 140 MB file before I can check what 
>> changes are part of the release.
>>
>> Also one of the things that Clutch checks in the Incubator is that there is 
>> a KEYS file in the distribution area, separate of the release artifacts. So, 
>> I would say it should be there.
>>
>>>  You just need to
>>> untar/unzip it.
>>
>> Thanks for the pointer. I'd like to see the source and binary tarballs 
>> separated. Strictly speaking, you really only need a source release, but 
>> it's up to you guys I think if you want to provide a binary one too. The 
>> advantage is that the source release is likely much smaller I'm guessing 
>> than the binary.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Hi Grant,
>>>>
>>>> Is this a source or binary release? How are you guys making the release? 
>>>> Using Ant or Maven?
>>>>
>>>> Can you guys provide a KEYS and CHANGES.txt file as part of the release 
>>>> artifacts?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 6, 2011, at 5:12 AM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>>>>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>>>>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Grant
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ++
>>>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>>>> Senior Computer Scientist
>>>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>>>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
>>>> Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.g

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

> The key should also be added to a pgp key server.
>

The key has already been added to the MIT web of trust - I presume
that is what you meant?


>
> AIUI there must be a source distribution; the binary distribution is optional.
>
> The consumer should not be forced to download the binary distribution
> in order to get the source.
>

Very well; we will discontinue all binary distributions.

One major problem will therefore be that we rely on Apache Forrest to
build the documentation pages.  Forrest requires Java 1.5.  The
availability of documentation in the release will therefore depend on
the availability of Java 1.5 to the person building it.  Is this
acceptable?

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

>> Very well; we will discontinue all binary distributions.
>
> That's not what I said.
>
> You can have a binary distribution if you wish, but there must be a
> source distribution.
>

As I said before, it makes no sense to distribute ManifoldCF binaries
without complete sources.  So we could (I suppose) have a source
distribution AND a source+binary distribution.  But we could not
simply have a binary distribution and a source distribution.

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

>
> Also, the NOTICE and LICENSE files don't seem to be quite right.
>
> The NOTICE file is for required notices only; so for example there is
> no need to mention other ASF projects.
>
> The LICENSE file references JUnit, which does not need to be
> distributed, so is not needed in the LICENSE.
>

These are based on what was done for Solr and Lucene.  Solr and Lucene
distribute JUnit, so that you may run the Solr and Lucene tests.
ManifoldCF does the same.

If you want us to remove JUnit from the distribution, then you cannot
test the connectors you build, which is definitely a problem.  I don't
think you'd really have a valid release if you did that.

Similarly, the Solr and Lucene NOTICE files include references to all
included Apache jars as well, and Grant was pretty insistent that I
include those.  I'm not sure why.

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

>
> The md5 hash file has an odd syntax, which makes it harder to use with
> automated checking tools.
>
> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubator.zip: A3 3E 0A 9F 58 94 DC 64  F7 B3 ED DB 63 
> 2E
>                                     CB EF
>
> The standard format is
>
> a33e0a9f5894dc64f7b3eddb632ecbef *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubator.zip
>
> (upper case hex also valid)
>

The signature was generated with OpenPGP.  I must not be using the
right switches or something; I'll do some research and change my
script accordingly.

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The whole question of ease-of-use is what drove this packaging
arrangement.  I was told it was unacceptable to not have a working
example out of the box that could be executed in a single line.  Build
and execution Instructions which involve obtaining a couple of dozen
jars from other places do not fulfill this criterion.

The three copies of the dependent jars occur because of the following:

- There is one copy of the jar that is used by the build
- There are two distinct execution environments, one single-process,
and one multi-process, that are built
- Each execution environment has its own subtree that it executes from

If the built environments are no longer distributed, then there will
be one copy of each dependent jar included.  I'm leaning towards just
having this minimum distribution since size is apparently a huge issue
here.  I still want to know if the source distribution should have the
forrest-built docs or not, though, or whether it should be up to the
user to build their own docs using Forrest themselves.  I would prefer
the former because Forrest is somewhat idiosyncratic, but you guys are
the bosses.

Karl

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 1:39 PM, sebb  wrote:
> On 6 January 2011 18:23, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>>> Very well; we will discontinue all binary distributions.
>>>
>>> That's not what I said.
>>>
>>> You can have a binary distribution if you wish, but there must be a
>>> source distribution.
>>>
>>
>> As I said before, it makes no sense to distribute ManifoldCF binaries
>> without complete sources.  So we could (I suppose) have a source
>> distribution AND a source+binary distribution.
>
> That would be fine.
>
>>  But we could not simply have a binary distribution and a source 
>> distribution.
>
> That would also work, but would require binary users to download both 
> archives.
>
> ==
>
> On a separate matter, I question whether the current packaging is optimal.
> There appear to be 3 copies of every jar in the binary zip file - no
> wonder the file is so large!
>
> Also, many of the included jars are commonly used elsewhere, so the
> consumer may well already have a copy.
>
> Generally, the binary jar consists of the compiled source files only.
>
> Some projects provide additional bundles which include all the
> required dependencies; that might be the way to go here.
>
>> Karl
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

> It's unacceptable to not release software according to Apache guidelines. 
> There's some flexibility in those guidelines (whether to include a binary 
> release or not, whether to include jar files in a distro or use Maven, etc.), 
> and then there's not (must include a source release; must have a KEYS file; 
> etc.etc.)
>

I'm not arguing; I've accepted the conclusion that there will be no
binary distribution.

>>
>> The three copies of the dependent jars occur because of the following:
>>
>> - There is one copy of the jar that is used by the build
>> - There are two distinct execution environments, one single-process,
>> and one multi-process, that are built
>> - Each execution environment has its own subtree that it executes from
>
> Are all of these Jars simply copies of an original Jar, or are they 
> separately licensed?
>

It's all the same license.  The dependent jars are copied into the
appropriate target locations by the build process.  So without the
build, you have one copy of each dependent jar.

>>
>> If the built environments are no longer distributed, then there will
>> be one copy of each dependent jar included.  I'm leaning towards just
>> having this minimum distribution since size is apparently a huge issue
>> here.
>
> It's a huge issue everywhere. Your release will be mirrored around the world 
> using Apache's mirroring system. Beyond that it will be likely replicated N 
> times at M companies who are using it. Size *is* a big issue, not just *here*.

This was not obvious to me in the era of 1Tb disks costing $50.
Builds of this size have not been considered problematic in any place
I've worked for at least a decade.  But I will accept your
restrictions.

>
> Eh, either way is fine with me, and I don't think anyone here should 
> legislate on this. It should be a ManifoldCF community decision IMHO.
>

If you are flexible, I will recommend we include the built docs.  It
will increase the size of the distribution somewhat (from 32M to 45M
per tar.gz/zip), but it gives the user much more environmental
flexibility.

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

Since this is a release candidate, and the release has not yet been
signed off, the tag has not yet been created.  There is, however, a
release branch, from which the release candidates get built.  When the
sign off occurs, the tag will be created from that branch.

Karl


On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:03 PM, sebb  wrote:
> Where is the SVN tag for the release?
>
> On 6 January 2011 13:12, Grant Ingersoll  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>
>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Grant
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Confusing naming of Manifold Connector Framework resources

[Karl Wright]

The official name of the project has changed repeatedly.  The current
official name is "ManifoldCF".  The community expects to change both
the SVN root and the web-site root upon incubation in any case, which
is why we have not changed either of these yet.  A bigger area of
concern is the prefix used for ManifoldCF tickets in Jira, which is
CONNECTORS-xxx.  This is apparently very difficult to change without
losing a project's old tickets.  I am hoping that change will not be
needed.

Karl


On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:17 PM, sebb  wrote:
> It's quite difficult finding the resources for the Manifold Connector 
> Framework.
>
> The Incubator web-site is at:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/connectors/
>
> SVN appears to be at:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/
>
> The Java package is
>
> org.apache.manifoldcf
>
>
> So the project currently uses the following 3 ids:
>
> connectors
> lcf
> manifoldcf
>
> in different namespaces.
>
> This is going to be very confusing when the project graduates;
> normally the Java package, SVN tree, website and PMC share the same
> id.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

Yes, that is the correct branch.

If there is an official Apache tagging strategy, I'm fine with that.
Heretofore I've been using the MetaCarta release tagging strategy,
which was partly gated on a restriction in the MetaCarta svn setup
that prevented tags from being renamed or deleted.  Your proposal
sounds perfectly reasonable, though - I can begin to do it that way on
the next RC (which will actually be RC4).

Karl

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:25 PM, sebb  wrote:
> On 6 January 2011 20:06, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> Since this is a release candidate, and the release has not yet been
>> signed off, the tag has not yet been created.  There is, however, a
>> release branch, from which the release candidates get built.  When the
>> sign off occurs, the tag will be created from that branch.
>
> I see. I assume you are referring to:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/branches/release-0.1-branch/
>
> ==
>
> Another way to do this is to create a tag (with an RCn suffix) and
> built the RC from that.
>
> If the RC succeeds, rename the tag to remove the RCn suffix.
>
> If the RC fails, fix the code, create RCn+1 and repeat.
> The RCn tag can be deleted later when the release has been made or abandoned.
>
> That way, there is a fixed tag that is used to create the RC which
> reviewers can also use.
>
> The RCn tags are also useful for reviewers to be able to quickly check
> exactly what has changed between RCs.
>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:03 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>> Where is the SVN tag for the release?
>>>
>>> On 6 January 2011 13:12, Grant Ingersoll  wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>>>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>>>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Grant
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The failure to build occurs because the directory it is complaining
about doesn't seem to exist after the zip is unpacked.  The directory
is empty at the time of the build.  It's not clear whether the problem
is the built zip itself or the way you are unpacking it.  I'll need to
look into this more tonight.

Karl


On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:26 PM, ant elder  wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Grant Ingersoll  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>
>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Grant
>>
>
> I've reviewed this and think it mostly fine.
>
> The NOTICE file does include some unnecessary things, i don't think
> thats technically a blocking issue but as this is the first RC of the
> first release it should probably be cleaned up and another RC done.
> The NOTICE file should only include required notices that other text
> if its really needed could go in a README file, see
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
>
> I think this current source+binary distribution is fine. The "rule" is
> that you can only release binary artifacts which also have the source
> released, but there are no rules saying the source distribution must
> not include any binary artifacts, so if this is what the project
> thinks works best then its fine.
>
> It is missing the Incubating disclaimer text which should be included
> in the README or a DISCLAIMER file, see
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html#disclaimers
>
> I tried building it with "ant build" and that failed, don't know if
> that my environment or something else:
> BUILD FAILED
> C:\ASF\manifoldcf\apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubator\build.xml:353: The
> following error occurred while executing this line:
> C:\ASF\manifoldcf\apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubator\connectors\jdbc\build.xml:52:
> C:\ASF\manifoldcf\apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubator\co
> nnectors\jdbc\jdbc-drivers does not exist.
>
> Other than that it looks ok to me. Its big and inlcudes some duplicate
> stuff but if thats what the project thinks is the best approach then
> its fine, there are plenty of other big projects being distributed.
>
>   ..ant
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

We've been using the RAT tool.  The files without headers are in part
Microsoft project files, which cannot have headers added without
breaking them.  Also, we build JSON sources, which are licensed with
an accepted JSON license that RAT does not recognize.

I've captured a lot of these exceptions in the ant target "rat-sources".

Karl

If you have specific concerns, let's discuss them.

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:03 PM, sebb  wrote:
> Just noticed that there are a lot of source files without AL headers.
> The RAT tool can detect these for you.
>
> Also, there should normally be a DISCLAIMER file at the top-level of
> archives and SVN trees.
>
> It's simpler to have this in a separate file, which can then just be
> deleted upon graduation.
>
> On 6 January 2011 13:12, Grant Ingersoll  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>
>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Grant
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The .cs files are maintained by Visual Studio and you cannot change
the format if you want them to keep working.  Same with the .map file.
 I will add them to exclusions for the rat target

The .tld's were taken from Apache Tomcat, but did not include Apache
headers.  I am not sure what I should do with those, which is why I
left them as is.  What is your recommendation?

Karl



On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:26 PM, sebb  wrote:
> On 6 January 2011 22:38, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> We've been using the RAT tool.
>
> In which case it would be helpful to provide the RAT report(s).
>
>> The files without headers are in part
>> Microsoft project files, which cannot have headers added without
>> breaking them.  Also, we build JSON sources, which are licensed with
>> an accepted JSON license that RAT does not recognize.
>>
>> I've captured a lot of these exceptions in the ant target "rat-sources".
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> If you have specific concerns, let's discuss them.
>
> The following sources don't appear to be JSON files, yet they don't
> have AL headers:
>
> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/x.tld
> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/sql.tld
> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/fmt.tld
> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/c.tld
> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Web
> References/SPPermissionsService/Reference.map
> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Properties/Settings.settings
> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Properties/AssemblyInfo.cs
> connectors/meridio/webservice/Test Harness/source code/TestHarness.cs
>
> AFAICT these are not excluded by the Ant target.
>
> BTW some of the .cs files appear to have BOM markers - not sure
> whether that is intentional.
>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:03 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>> Just noticed that there are a lot of source files without AL headers.
>>> The RAT tool can detect these for you.
>>>
>>> Also, there should normally be a DISCLAIMER file at the top-level of
>>> archives and SVN trees.
>>>
>>> It's simpler to have this in a separate file, which can then just be
>>> deleted upon graduation.
>>>
>>> On 6 January 2011 13:12, Grant Ingersoll  wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>>>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>>>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Grant
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

They were downloaded from the jakarta standard taglibs 1.1.2, from this URL:

http://jakarta.apache.org/site/downloads/downloads_taglibs-standard.cgi

The project was folded into tomcat, but I simply used the tag
libraries from the separately-bundled artifact.  It turns out that the
Apache headers were not on it, however, although it seems very clear
that these *should* have apache headers on them.

I'm happy to just go ahead and do that, unless you think it would be a mistake.

Karl

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 8:13 PM, sebb  wrote:
> On 6 January 2011 23:53, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> The .cs files are maintained by Visual Studio and you cannot change
>> the format if you want them to keep working.  Same with the .map file.
>>  I will add them to exclusions for the rat target
>>
>> The .tld's were taken from Apache Tomcat, but did not include Apache
>> headers.  I am not sure what I should do with those, which is why I
>> left them as is.  What is your recommendation?
>
> Depends on the source. If they are ASF files then they should have ASF
> headers in Tomcat and here.
> If not, then they may require entries in NOTICE or LICENSE.
> Probably best to re-check the Tomcat sources, and if there is no
> header, ask why on the Tomcat list.
>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:26 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>> On 6 January 2011 22:38, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>>> We've been using the RAT tool.
>>>
>>> In which case it would be helpful to provide the RAT report(s).
>>>
>>>> The files without headers are in part
>>>> Microsoft project files, which cannot have headers added without
>>>> breaking them.  Also, we build JSON sources, which are licensed with
>>>> an accepted JSON license that RAT does not recognize.
>>>>
>>>> I've captured a lot of these exceptions in the ant target "rat-sources".
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>> If you have specific concerns, let's discuss them.
>>>
>>> The following sources don't appear to be JSON files, yet they don't
>>> have AL headers:
>>>
>>> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/x.tld
>>> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/sql.tld
>>> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/fmt.tld
>>> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/c.tld
>>> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Web
>>> References/SPPermissionsService/Reference.map
>>> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Properties/Settings.settings
>>> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Properties/AssemblyInfo.cs
>>> connectors/meridio/webservice/Test Harness/source code/TestHarness.cs
>>>
>>> AFAICT these are not excluded by the Ant target.
>>>
>>> BTW some of the .cs files appear to have BOM markers - not sure
>>> whether that is intentional.
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:03 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>>>> Just noticed that there are a lot of source files without AL headers.
>>>>> The RAT tool can detect these for you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, there should normally be a DISCLAIMER file at the top-level of
>>>>> archives and SVN trees.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's simpler to have this in a separate file, which can then just be
>>>>> deleted upon graduation.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 6 January 2011 13:12, Grant Ingersoll  wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first set of 
>>>>>> artifacts and now would like an Incubator vote.  Since this is our first 
>>>>>> release, extra attention to detail is appreciated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You can find the artifacts at http://people.apache.org/~kwright/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Grant
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The RAT report after these changes looks good except for two files,
which come from the skins in the site:

[rat:report] Unapproved licenses:
[rat:report]
[rat:report]   
C:/wip/mcf-release/release-0.1-branch/site/src/documentation/skins/common/xslt/html/split.xsl
[rat:report]   
C:/wip/mcf-release/release-0.1-branch/site/src/documentation/skins/lucene/note.txt
[rat:report]
[rat:report] ***

One of these looks like it comes from Forrest itself (the first), and
has this header:



No idea what to do about that one.

The other is merely a "todo" list in the Lucene skin, which I believe
could simply be removed.

Thoughts?
Karl

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> They were downloaded from the jakarta standard taglibs 1.1.2, from this URL:
>
> http://jakarta.apache.org/site/downloads/downloads_taglibs-standard.cgi
>
> The project was folded into tomcat, but I simply used the tag
> libraries from the separately-bundled artifact.  It turns out that the
> Apache headers were not on it, however, although it seems very clear
> that these *should* have apache headers on them.
>
> I'm happy to just go ahead and do that, unless you think it would be a 
> mistake.
>
> Karl
>
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 8:13 PM, sebb  wrote:
>> On 6 January 2011 23:53, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>> The .cs files are maintained by Visual Studio and you cannot change
>>> the format if you want them to keep working.  Same with the .map file.
>>>  I will add them to exclusions for the rat target
>>>
>>> The .tld's were taken from Apache Tomcat, but did not include Apache
>>> headers.  I am not sure what I should do with those, which is why I
>>> left them as is.  What is your recommendation?
>>
>> Depends on the source. If they are ASF files then they should have ASF
>> headers in Tomcat and here.
>> If not, then they may require entries in NOTICE or LICENSE.
>> Probably best to re-check the Tomcat sources, and if there is no
>> header, ask why on the Tomcat list.
>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 6:26 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>>> On 6 January 2011 22:38, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>>>> We've been using the RAT tool.
>>>>
>>>> In which case it would be helpful to provide the RAT report(s).
>>>>
>>>>> The files without headers are in part
>>>>> Microsoft project files, which cannot have headers added without
>>>>> breaking them.  Also, we build JSON sources, which are licensed with
>>>>> an accepted JSON license that RAT does not recognize.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've captured a lot of these exceptions in the ant target "rat-sources".
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>> If you have specific concerns, let's discuss them.
>>>>
>>>> The following sources don't appear to be JSON files, yet they don't
>>>> have AL headers:
>>>>
>>>> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/x.tld
>>>> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/sql.tld
>>>> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/fmt.tld
>>>> framework/crawler-ui/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/jsp/c.tld
>>>> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Web
>>>> References/SPPermissionsService/Reference.map
>>>> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Properties/Settings.settings
>>>> connectors/sharepoint/webservice/Properties/AssemblyInfo.cs
>>>> connectors/meridio/webservice/Test Harness/source code/TestHarness.cs
>>>>
>>>> AFAICT these are not excluded by the Ant target.
>>>>
>>>> BTW some of the .cs files appear to have BOM markers - not sure
>>>> whether that is intentional.
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:03 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>>>>> Just noticed that there are a lot of source files without AL headers.
>>>>>> The RAT tool can detect these for you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, there should normally be a DISCLAIMER file at the top-level of
>>>>>> archives and SVN trees.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's simpler to have this in a separate file, which can then just be
>>>>>> deleted upon graduation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6 January 2011 13:12, Grant Ingersoll  wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Apache ManifoldCF community has voted to release our first

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The ManifoldCF documentation already requires Forrest 0.9-dev.  If
there was a downloadable binary version of 0.9-dev available, I'd be
willing to consider requiring the user to install it.  But that added
step is just too much, I think, to expect people to do as part of an
initial ManifoldCF setup.

Karl

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 5:22 PM, David Crossley  wrote:
> Karl Wright wrote:
>>
>> Very well; we will discontinue all binary distributions.
>>
>> One major problem will therefore be that we rely on Apache Forrest to
>> build the documentation pages.  Forrest requires Java 1.5.  The
>> availability of documentation in the release will therefore depend on
>> the availability of Java 1.5 to the person building it.  Is this
>> acceptable?
>
> It is a tiny isolated problem.
>
> There are two simple workarounds. People do not
> need to stick with Java 1.5
>
> http://forrest.apache.org/faq.html#oldjing
>
> -David
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The release is numbered 0.1-incubator right now.  I could not find any
rule that said what the actual format of the release number should be.
 Can you point me to the document that describes this?

Thanks,
Karl

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 4:35 AM, Mark Struberg  wrote:
> btw, the release number should not be 0.1 but incubation-0.1 according to the 
> Incubator rules.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
> --- On Fri, 1/7/11, David Crossley  wrote:
>
>> From: David Crossley 
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Date: Friday, January 7, 2011, 8:29 AM
>> Karl Wright wrote:
>> > The ManifoldCF documentation already requires Forrest
>> 0.9-dev.  If
>> > there was a downloadable binary version of 0.9-dev
>> available, I'd be
>> > willing to consider requiring the user to install
>> it.  But that added
>> > step is just too much, I think, to expect people to do
>> as part of an
>> > initial ManifoldCF setup.
>>
>> One consolation is that we do finally have a release of 0.9
>> planned.
>> http://s.apache.org/ln
>>
>> -David
>>
>> > David Crossley wrote:
>> > > Karl Wright wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Very well; we will discontinue all binary
>> distributions.
>> > >>
>> > >> One major problem will therefore be that we
>> rely on Apache Forrest to
>> > >> build the documentation pages.  Forrest
>> requires Java 1.5.  The
>> > >> availability of documentation in the release
>> will therefore depend on
>> > >> the availability of Java 1.5 to the person
>> building it.  Is this
>> > >> acceptable?
>> > >
>> > > It is a tiny isolated problem.
>> > >
>> > > There are two simple workarounds. People do not
>> > > need to stick with Java 1.5
>> > >
>> > > http://forrest.apache.org/faq.html#oldjing
>> > >
>> > > -David
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

I have uploaded a new artifact now.

I could call this a release candidate except for the following:
- This artifact has not been voted on by the ManifoldCF community.  It
is probably necessary to revote since what is included in the package
has changed (e.g. no build artifacts except for docs).
- I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator
and community advice seemed contradictory.  I would like a general
sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE
files are unacceptable before I make changes.
- The two remaining RAT complaints, one of which comes from Forrest,
and one from Lucene, need resolution.  I posted about that earlier,
but I have received no advice.

I believe all other issues that have been raised have been addressed.
I would very much like it if the incubator would review the modified
artifact and see whether they agree.

Thanks,
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Confusing naming of Manifold Connector Framework resources

[Karl Wright]

On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 3:48 PM, sebb  wrote:
> On 6 January 2011 20:29, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> The official name of the project has changed repeatedly.  The current
>> official name is "ManifoldCF".  The community expects to change both
>> the SVN root and the web-site root upon incubation in any case, which
>> is why we have not changed either of these yet.
>
> OK, I see.
>

Sorry, that should have been "graduation", not "incubation".

>> A bigger area of
>> concern is the prefix used for ManifoldCF tickets in Jira, which is
>> CONNECTORS-xxx.  This is apparently very difficult to change without
>> losing a project's old tickets.  I am hoping that change will not be
>> needed.
>
> The Java package name hopefully won't need to be changed either ...
>

We don't believe so.
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The community wanted to include both a source and a source+binary
distribution.  Accordingly, I spun up one of those, which is RC5.  The
RC4 candidate is still up there, so I guess you can vote on either
one.

Thanks!
Karl

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Karl,
>
> Great job. +1 from me.
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

>
> I don't understand why ManifoldCF needs this special "skin" processing
> that then needs to live in your svn.
> At Forrest, we advise not to create their own skin unless absolutely
> necessary. We prefer to address any needs in the default skin.
>
> With a quick flick through the ManifoldCF site i do not see anything
> that needs a special skin, just a couple of colour specifications.
>
> Of course this would be better discussed at the Forrest mail lists.
> At the dev@ list, seeing that you are using the development version.
>
> However, i reckon that you should not hold up your release
> because of this.
>
> -David
>

Thanks for the advice.  The current Forrest skin was originally put
down by Grant so I will need to find out why he used it.  But it is
good to hear that these files can be excluded from the RAT report.

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble
describing components and their licenses.  I will remove the preamble
- it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an
example.

The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything
that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form.  If you think I should
move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time
to indicate that.  Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted.

Karl


On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder  wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>
>> - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator
>> and community advice seemed contradictory.  I would like a general
>> sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE
>> files are unacceptable before I make changes.
>
> The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary
> stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files
> is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first
> release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out.
>
> For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s):
>
> ---
> Apache ManifestCF
> Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> This product includes software developed by
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
> ---
>
> and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented
> somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add
> something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The
> NOTICE file should only include required notices, the other text thats
> in the current NOTICE file could go in a README file, see
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
>
> For the LICENSE file, it should start with the AL as the current one
> does, and then include the text for all the other licenses used in the
> distribution. Those license that are currently in the NOTICE file
> should be moved to the LICENSE file and then you need to verify that
> all the 3rd party dependencies in the src and binary distributions are
> also in the LICENSE files of those distributions.
>
>   ...ant
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

It is true that we've created no derivative Jetty or HSQLDB works. But
the Apache License 4(d) section does not explicitly mention Jetty and
HSQLDB as not requiring NOTICE text, and my understanding is that the
license terms for those components require the text I have included in
NOTICE.  I am checking with Solr/Lucene to find out why they concluded
they needed that text, but that may take a while.  They too are not
including this because they've created derivative works.  My guess is
that it has something to do with the following Apache policy:

# The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
third-party notices.
The NOTICE file may also include copyright notices moved from source
files submitted to the ASF.

Karl



On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 6:36 AM, ant elder  wrote:
> That NOTICE file still contains additional text about Jetty and
> HSQLDB, why is that needed? The Apache License section 4d describes
> what must be included in the NOTICE and AIUI it says you only need to
> include in your NOTICE the notices from Jetty and HSQLDB if you
> distribute derivitave works of them. Thats not what you're doing you
> are distributing copies of the them not Derivative Works so nothing is
> needed in your NOTICE file.
>
>   ...ant
>
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> Rather than spin a whole new RC and upload it, which takes me two
>> hours, I've attached the revised proposed NOTICE and LICENSE here, so
>> people can comment directly.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>> The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble
>>> describing components and their licenses.  I will remove the preamble
>>> - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an
>>> example.
>>>
>>> The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything
>>> that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form.  If you think I should
>>> move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time
>>> to indicate that.  Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator
>>>>> and community advice seemed contradictory.  I would like a general
>>>>> sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE
>>>>> files are unacceptable before I make changes.
>>>>
>>>> The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary
>>>> stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files
>>>> is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first
>>>> release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out.
>>>>
>>>> For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s):
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Apache ManifestCF
>>>> Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>
>>>> This product includes software developed by
>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented
>>>> somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add
>>>> something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The
>>>> NOTICE file should only include required notices, the other text thats
>>>> in the current NOTICE file could go in a README file, see
>>>> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
>>>>
>>>> For the LICENSE file, it should start with the AL as the current one
>>>> does, and then include the text for all the other licenses used in the
>>>> distribution. Those license that are currently in the NOTICE file
>>>> should be moved to the LICENSE file and then you need to verify that
>>>> all the 3rd party dependencies in the src and binary distributions are
>>>> also in the LICENSE files of those distributions.
>>>>
>>>>   ...ant
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

I've made the 2011 change already.  But I'm having trouble reconciling
 your instructions with this part of the Apache license:

>>>>>>
  (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
  distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
  include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
  within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
  pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
  of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
  as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
  documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
  within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
  wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
  of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
  do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
  notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
  or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
  that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
  as modifying the License.
<<<<<<

To the best of my knowledge, both remaining proposed NOTICE clauses
come from a NOTICE file or the equivalent in the source work.  The
meaning of "Derivative Work" is obviously what the question is - does
inclusion imply derivation?  Because, we are including it.

The short notices you are recommending I can certainly put back in,
but that goes directly against ant elder's request that they be
removed.  Indeed, it sounded to me like he thought there should be
nothing in NOTICE.txt other than the header.

Karl


On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:51 AM, sebb  wrote:
> Note: the NOTICE year will need to be changed for the next release to 
> 2010-2011.
> For the current release I think it can remain as is - there don't seem
> to have been any substantive changes made in 2011.
>
> The leading blank lines need to be removed.
>
> Otherwise, I concur with what Ant has mentioned elsethread.
> The NOTICE file needs to be as short as possible; think of it as an About box.
>
> Generally at most one or two lines are needed per product (as for ASF code)
> So for any products that *require* a notice, the following should be enough:
>
> ===
> This product contains MegaCorp FOO
> Copyright (c) 1995-2000 by the MegaCorp Universal Corporation
> ===
>
> The full details go in the LICENSE file.
>
> On 8 January 2011 11:05, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> Rather than spin a whole new RC and upload it, which takes me two
>> hours, I've attached the revised proposed NOTICE and LICENSE here, so
>> people can comment directly.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>> The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble
>>> describing components and their licenses.  I will remove the preamble
>>> - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an
>>> example.
>>>
>>> The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything
>>> that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form.  If you think I should
>>> move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time
>>> to indicate that.  Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator
>>>>> and community advice seemed contradictory.  I would like a general
>>>>> sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE
>>>>> files are unacceptable before I make changes.
>>>>
>>>> The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary
>>>> stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files
>>>> is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first
>>>> release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out.
>>>>
>>>> For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s):
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Apache ManifestCF
>>>> Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>
>>>> This product includes software developed by
>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

I've confirmed the following:

(1) The Jetty notice text I've included came from the source Jetty NOTICE file.
(2) The HSQLDB notice text I've included is NOT the same as the HSQLDB
license text, and very likely came from an HSQLDB NOTICE file also.

So, if I'm doing it wrong, at least I'm being consistent.  There is NO
license information in NOTICE.txt, as it stands now.

Karl

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> I've made the 2011 change already.  But I'm having trouble reconciling
>  your instructions with this part of the Apache license:
>
>>>>>>>
>      (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
>          distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
>          include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
>          within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
>          pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
>          of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
>          as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
>          documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
>          within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
>          wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
>          of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
>          do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
>          notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
>          or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
>          that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
>          as modifying the License.
> <<<<<<
>
> To the best of my knowledge, both remaining proposed NOTICE clauses
> come from a NOTICE file or the equivalent in the source work.  The
> meaning of "Derivative Work" is obviously what the question is - does
> inclusion imply derivation?  Because, we are including it.
>
> The short notices you are recommending I can certainly put back in,
> but that goes directly against ant elder's request that they be
> removed.  Indeed, it sounded to me like he thought there should be
> nothing in NOTICE.txt other than the header.
>
> Karl
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:51 AM, sebb  wrote:
>> Note: the NOTICE year will need to be changed for the next release to 
>> 2010-2011.
>> For the current release I think it can remain as is - there don't seem
>> to have been any substantive changes made in 2011.
>>
>> The leading blank lines need to be removed.
>>
>> Otherwise, I concur with what Ant has mentioned elsethread.
>> The NOTICE file needs to be as short as possible; think of it as an About 
>> box.
>>
>> Generally at most one or two lines are needed per product (as for ASF code)
>> So for any products that *require* a notice, the following should be enough:
>>
>> ===
>> This product contains MegaCorp FOO
>> Copyright (c) 1995-2000 by the MegaCorp Universal Corporation
>> ===
>>
>> The full details go in the LICENSE file.
>>
>> On 8 January 2011 11:05, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>> Rather than spin a whole new RC and upload it, which takes me two
>>> hours, I've attached the revised proposed NOTICE and LICENSE here, so
>>> people can comment directly.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>>> The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble
>>>> describing components and their licenses.  I will remove the preamble
>>>> - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an
>>>> example.
>>>>
>>>> The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything
>>>> that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form.  If you think I should
>>>> move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time
>>>> to indicate that.  Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted.
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator
>>>>>> and community advice seemed contradictory.  I would like a general
>>>>>> sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE
>>>>>> files are unacceptable before I make

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

Ok, so then it sounds like all of the current contents of NOTICE.txt
can technically be removed.  Where should these go?  LICENSE.txt?
README.txt?  The circular file?  I've received one recommendation for
each.

Karl

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>
> On Jan 8, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Karl Wright wrote:
>
>> I've made the 2011 change already.  But I'm having trouble reconciling
>> your instructions with this part of the Apache license:
>>
>>>>>>>>
>>      (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its
>>          distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must
>>          include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained
>>          within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not
>>          pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one
>>          of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed
>>          as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or
>>          documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or,
>>          within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and
>>          wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents
>>          of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and
>>          do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution
>>          notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside
>>          or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided
>>          that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed
>>          as modifying the License.
>> <<<<<<
>>
>> To the best of my knowledge, both remaining proposed NOTICE clauses
>> come from a NOTICE file or the equivalent in the source work.  The
>> meaning of "Derivative Work" is obviously what the question is - does
>> inclusion imply derivation?  Because, we are including it.
>
> The confusion is understandable. The Free Software Foundation's definition of 
> derivative work would probably apply to anything that is included to create 
> the larger work. We aren't the Free Software Foundation. IAround here you 
> will find the definition of derivative work to mean that you have taken the 
> original work and made changes to it - regardless of any other code that 
> might use the included work.  So if you are just including a jar and using 
> the interfaces it exposes then yours is not a derivative work of the first.
>
> At the beginning of the Apache License you will find the definition of 
> derivative work
>
> "Derivative Works" shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object form, 
> that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the editorial 
> revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a 
> whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes of this License, 
> Derivative Works shall not include works that remain separable from, or 
> merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of, the Work and Derivative 
> Works thereof.
>
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

I need to respin anyway because the bits in the archives need to
change, and thus all the signatures.  The new bits also need to be
voted on by the community.  I was simply trying to short-circuit the
process for editorial convergence on these three files.

I will start a new vote thread for RC6 (which is the next RC) when:
(a) the upload is complete
(b) the ManifoldCF community has voted

The RC6 candidate currently has no known issues, provided my sense is
correct that the new LICENSE and NOTICE text are acceptable now.

Karl

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Karl,
>
> For consistency and for the purposes of VOTE'ing on the bits at your RC URL 
> that will actually get copied to Apache's distribution servers, I'd like to 
> see you create another RC directory. You don't have to respin the RC code, 
> just copy the current contents into a new directory with a new RC rev # and 
> include your three updated text files in it from here. I would also like to 
> see a new [VOTE] thread, like this:
>
> [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 RC #N
>
> That way it's clear in mailing list threads how many +1s were attained, etc., 
> without having to do a lot of detective work.
>
> Thanks for working the process. Trust me: it gets easier :)
>
> Once the above is done, I don't foresee any objections from me!
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> On Jan 8, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Karl Wright wrote:
>
>> I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and
>> LICENSE.txt.  Any further comments?
>>
>> Karl
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> ++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

I'd be happy to provide it.
Thanks,
Karl

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> One other note:
>
> We probably should also see an SVN tag (or branch) URL in your release [VOTE] 
> thread, so folks can also inspect the bits there. It's important to know what 
> we're VOTE'ing on is consistent with what's in SVN.
>
> Honestly, as much as it would suck to spend another 2 hours of time, I'm 
> wondering if it's just best to create another tag or branch in SVN and 
> re-spin the release for consistency.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> On Jan 8, 2011, at 1:24 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>
>> Hi Karl,
>>
>> For consistency and for the purposes of VOTE'ing on the bits at your RC URL 
>> that will actually get copied to Apache's distribution servers, I'd like to 
>> see you create another RC directory. You don't have to respin the RC code, 
>> just copy the current contents into a new directory with a new RC rev # and 
>> include your three updated text files in it from here. I would also like to 
>> see a new [VOTE] thread, like this:
>>
>> [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 RC #N
>>
>> That way it's clear in mailing list threads how many +1s were attained, 
>> etc., without having to do a lot of detective work.
>>
>> Thanks for working the process. Trust me: it gets easier :)
>>
>> Once the above is done, I don't foresee any objections from me!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>> On Jan 8, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>
>>> I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and
>>> LICENSE.txt.  Any further comments?
>>>
>>> Karl
>>> 
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>> ++
>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
>> Senior Computer Scientist
>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
>> Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov
>> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
>> ++
>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
>> ++
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

(1) There already is a separate DISCLAIMER.txt.  I have attached it
for your consideration.
(2) As discussed earlier, the LICENSE file already contains sections
for HSQLDB and Jetty; the stuff added to the end of the README came
from NOTICE files in those projects, and is not license material.
(3) I don't know what download tool you have, but if you look in SVN
you will note that there are indeed no blank lines at the start of any
of the files.
(4) Making yet another ant target will make a very complex build twice
as complex.  I don't think that is wise at this point.

In short, I don't think there is any point in further changes.

Thanks,
Karl

On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 8:48 PM, sebb  wrote:
> On 8 January 2011 16:40, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and
>> LICENSE.txt.  Any further comments?
>
> As previously mentioned, all the files appear to have leading blank lines.
> These should be removed.
>
> The README file says:
>
> "Apache ManifoldCF is a multi-repository crawler framework, with
> multiple connectors,
> under incubation."
>
> This is insufficient as an incubation disclaimer.
> However I suggest the reference to incubation is removed, and a
> separate DISCLAIMER file created.
>
> See for example:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/empire-db/trunk/DISCLAIMER.txt
>
> Also, I think the NOTICEs at the end ot the README belong in the LICENSE file.
>
> ==
>
> As an entirely separate issue, the README says that the project has to
> be built before use, and explains that one needs to download Java and
> Ant.
> If that is the case, why not include a download section in the build
> file which fetches all the dependencies?
>
> Or at least have an Ant target that copies the jar files to the
> correct directories, and update the binary package to include a single
> copy of each only.
>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
# Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
# contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file distributed with
# this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
# The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
# (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
# the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
#
# http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
#
# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
# distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
# WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
# See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
# limitations under the License.

Apache ManifoldCF (formerly Apache Connectors Framework) is an effort undergoing
incubation at The Apache Software Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Lucene PMC.
Incubation is required of all newly accepted projects until a further review 
indicates
that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process have 
stabilized
in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects. While incubation 
status is
not necessarily a reflection of the completeness or stability of the code, it 
does
indicate that the project has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

> I still think the binary archive is unnecessarily bloated, and will
> cause wasted load and resources for mirrors and consumers.
>

If it were straightforward, I would already have done it.

Here's a rundown of the space usage in the dist directory of the -bin object:

doc:
 995 File(s) 37,349,684 bytes
example:
  64 File(s) 55,753,928 bytes
processes:
  42 File(s) 13,610,369 bytes
web:
   3 File(s) 37,917,103 bytes
lib:
  10 File(s)  1,400,982 bytes

The "doc" area includes Forrest generated html and pdf, along with Javadoc.

As I stated before, there is two of everything, because there is a
binary area set up for multiprocess execution, and a second one set up
for single-process.  The single-process one is entirely encapsulated
under "example" above.  The multiprocess one is spread among
"processes", "web", and "lib".

The "web" part consists of three .war files that are part of
ManifoldCF.  Each of them is of significant size, 12M, because they
are set up to be potentially deployed independently.  The same .war
files are present in the "example" single-process setup, although the
dependent jars within are not used there because it is single-process.

(1) The biggest possible help would be to have both a single-process
target and a multi-process target, and only ship the single-process
example.  Savings: about 55M.  Downside: Minor changes to the
"how-to-build-and-deploy" documentation, and no multi-process binaries
shipped.  But, if we ask people to build their own multi-process
deployment, that then begs the question, why are we shipping ANY
binaries at all?  They could just as readily build the single-process
version too.

(2) Second biggest: build separate single-process and multi-process
war targets.  This would introduce, however, a dual target throughout
every level of the build system - doubling the complexity as I
explained.  Luckily, this would NOT extend to connector builds.
Potential savings: about 36M.

(3) The change you proposed, copying dependent jars into place after
download, depends on the size of the dependent jars and where they
wind up.  The size of jars which come from dependencies:
  38 File(s) 13,604,879 bytes
As I said, there are two open copies of these, one for the
single-process and one for the multi-process.  This option would also
increase build complexity considerably, because all the test and doc
targets rely on the multi-process jars to be in place, and also would
require me to rework the "how-to-build-and-deploy" documentation
significantly, as well as end-user complexity.  Total possible
savings: 27M, or 13M if (1) were adopted above.

(4) Grant suggested that we simply not include the PDF portion of the
doc build.  This has the disadvantage of causing each site page to
have a broken link, but otherwise the PDFs are not of great value,
excepting perhaps the end-user documentation PDF.  Savings: about 10M.

My proposed solution, which was to ship only built documentation (for
ease of bootstrapping) and allow everyone to build their own binaries,
was disliked by Grant.  So basically we're now in a position of
choosing half a loaf and arguing over what half.  Unfortunately this
is not a technical decision - it is a political one.  So please make
your preferences known, and ideally you and Grant can have it out over
the right way to slice the loaf.

Thanks,
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1

[Karl Wright]

> Not sure what you mean by "open" copy.
>

"Open" meaning not bound up in a war.

> There are also 2 copies of each of the war files, total 37M for one set.
>

Yes, that's known to me; so you are also suggesting that not just the
dependent jars be treated this way, but all the built artifacts as
well.

>
> Sorry, but I still don't understand the complexity argument. Here's
> what I am suggesting:
>

I understand what you are suggesting.  The complexity comes from the
fact that the build is all conditionalized already in three different
dimensions.  Each connector may or may not be buildable, and the build
logic that assembles the final artifacts must pay attention to that
condition.

This is likely to be a complicated explanation, so bear with me.

(1) Each primary component (framework, each connector) has its own
dist area, and its own build.xml.
(2) Each component build.xml has several well-known build targets,
e.g. "build", "doc", "test" etc.  The rule is that the smarts for
deciding what jars need to run in what processes goes in each
component build, not in the main build.
(3) A major job of the main build.xml is to assemble all these
components together in a final artifact.
(4) Because there are two different models, there are already two
different sets of targets in the final build for doing that:
deliver-xxx-example, and deliver-xxx.
(5) Each deliver-xxx target blindly copies what is needed from the
xxx/dist area into the multiprocess area, and builds the wars from the
proper stuff in xxx/dist based blindly on what's in a particular
xxx/dist directory.
(6) Each deliver-xxx-example target blindly copies what is needed from
the xxx/dist area into the example area, AND also adds a registration
entry to a connectors.xml configuration file.
(7) Currently, the build image does NOT include xxx/dist at all, just
the main dist/ area.

Your suggestion, therefore, is tantamount to the following:
(1) Keep the xxx/dist area in the distribution, EXCEPT for the jars
which come from the dependencies and the jars which come from the
earlier components of the build.
(2) Do not include the dist/ area in the distribution.
(3) Do the delivery process under a separate "install" target.

The problems are (a) we have no way of knowing now what pieces for
each component came from upstream and which were built by the
component.  These would have to be separated out.  And, (b) by the
time we come around to doing the final "install" target, we've lost
the conditional information because we don't keep those directories
around in the distribution.

The alternative approach would be to revise the build so that all of
the pieces wind up in a "staging area", through an entirely separate
set of targets, which I'll call "deliver-xxx-staging".  That adds 50%
more targets, as you can see, and it also still has the (b) problem as
stated above.

I hope this clears up why I think your proposal adds significant complexity.

Thanks,
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: ManifoldCF - jars should not be stored in SVN

[Karl Wright]

Please point me at a URL where it says this is Apache policy.  I know
of several Apache projects which work the same way ManifoldCF does.
svn is perfectly capable of storing binary images of all kinds.

Karl


On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 5:53 PM, sebb  wrote:
> I've just noticed that there are lots of jars stored in SVN under
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/branches/release-0.1-branch
>
> AIUI, SVN should not be used for storing library jars.
>
> ==
>
> The way other projects manage this is to define the jar dependencies
> in a build file, and get the build process to download the jars.
>
> If using Maven, this is trivial, as declared dependencies are
> automatically downloaded.
>
> It's not that difficult when using Ant either - see for example the
> Tomcat or JMeter projects.
>
> There is also an Ant Maven task:
> http://maven.apache.org/ant-tasks/examples/dependencies.html
>
> and Apache Ivy
> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/
>
> though I've not used either of those.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: ManifoldCF - jars should not be stored in SVN

[Karl Wright]

We would like to eventually get them out of there, but both Grant and
I agreed early on that it wasn't the highest priority.  If it is
Apache policy, then obviously we'd have to change our minds.

When we attack this, we intend to use ant plus ivy, not Maven.  We
tried Maven and found it was difficult to do some of the things we
needed, and the Kool-aid was a bit much to swallow.

Karl


On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Benson Margulies  wrote:
> I'm sure that it isn't a policy. It's a good practice avoiding
> Subversion bloat. There are certainly Apache projects who still have a
> trunk-load of checked-in jars.
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] starting the CMS migration process

[Karl Wright]

I have a number of questions about this change.

First, ManifoldCF only uses the confluence wiki for the following uses:

- Where content has been contributed by non-Apache persons directly
- Where content has been contributed without an explicit Apache license grant

This begs the following questions:

(1) How do we address licensing concerns for content currently in the wiki?
(2) What kind of facility for anonymous access is available through Apache CMS?

The other interesting question has to do with overlap with existing
Apache projects.  In particular, there seems to be a great deal of
overlap between Apache Forrest and the Apache CMS.  Can someone
comment on that please?

Thanks,
Karl


On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Joe Schaefer  wrote:
> As mentioned at http://www.apache.org/dev/cms.html the
> Infrastructure Team would like the IPMC to consider migrating
> to the CMS over the coming weeks.  We will be completely
> phasing out support for Confluence backed sites this year,
> and would like to encourage all Apache projects still relying
> on Anakia (such as the Incubator) to migrate as well.  This
> undoubtedly will impact current and new podlings.
>
> More information on the CMS is available at the following links:
>
> http://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/the_asf_cms
> http://wiki.apache.org/general/ApacheCms2010
> http://www.apache.org/dev/infra-site.html
> http://www.apache.org/dev/cmsref.html
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating, RC8

[Karl Wright]

Calling the official vote for release of ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating,
RC8, which can be found at http://people.apache.org/~kwright .  The
community has voted for release of the new RC, so we're ready to go
ahead with an incubator vote on the same.

Thanks in advance!
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating, RC8

[Karl Wright]

Oh, forgot to mention that the release candidate tag is at:

http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.1-incubating-RC8/

Karl

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:48 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> Calling the official vote for release of ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating,
> RC8, which can be found at http://people.apache.org/~kwright .  The
> community has voted for release of the new RC, so we're ready to go
> ahead with an incubator vote on the same.
>
> Thanks in advance!
> Karl
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating, RC8

[Karl Wright]

Thanks for the votes!  Still need one more binding +1...
Karl

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Karl,
>
> +1 from me (binding).
>
> Signatures check out:
>
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --import 
> *.KEYS
> gpg: key 03824582: "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> " not changed
> gpg: key FE045966: "Grant Ingersoll (CODE SIGNING KEY) " 
> not changed
> gpg: Total number processed: 2
> gpg:              unchanged: 2
>
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz.asc
> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:16 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> "
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip.asc
> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:07 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> "
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc
> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:59 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> "
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip.asc
> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:41 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
> "
> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann%
>
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% cat *.md5
> C7CA5B01ADC5A785F63ED559169B4390 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
> CF1744BF9ACF2EFD17F705A875691B02 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip
> D134D3F1D01060F2B6800FB19572A576 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> BA2F388B9AF5E66FC0F1437C98EDF846 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip
>
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% md5sum 
> *-bin*.tar.gz *-bin*.zip *-src*.tar.gz *-src*.zip
> c7ca5b01adc5a785f63ed559169b4390  apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
> cf1744bf9acf2efd17f705a875691b02  apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip
> d134d3f1d01060f2b6800fb19572a576  apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> ba2f388b9af5e66fc0f1437c98edf846  apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip
> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann%
>
> Thanks for including CHANGES.txt and KEYS. That really helped.
>
> Great job and great working the process!
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 24, 2011, at 9:54 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>
>> Oh, forgot to mention that the release candidate tag is at:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.1-incubating-RC8/
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:48 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>> Calling the official vote for release of ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating,
>>> RC8, which can be found at http://people.apache.org/~kwright .  The
>>> community has voted for release of the new RC, so we're ready to go
>>> ahead with an incubator vote on the same.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance!
>>> Karl
>>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating, RC8

[Karl Wright]

About  5 hours after ant voted, a user discovered that a problem we'd
thought was fixed in RC8 is still in fact present, albeit in a
slightly different form.  The community is trying to figure out if
this should mean a new RC or not.  We did triage the problem initially
as a release blocker.

The main downside of a new RC is getting a quorum to evaluate and vote
on it in the incubator.  This part of the process took two weeks for
RC8.  The issue is CONNECTORS-148.  Any advice is welcome.  I believe
that the incubator vote is technically still open.

Thanks,
Karl

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 4:20 AM, ant elder  wrote:
> +1
>
>   ...ant
>
> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> Thanks for the votes!  Still need one more binding +1...
>> Karl
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi Karl,
>>>
>>> +1 from me (binding).
>>>
>>> Signatures check out:
>>>
>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --import 
>>> *.KEYS
>>> gpg: key 03824582: "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>> " not changed
>>> gpg: key FE045966: "Grant Ingersoll (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>> " not changed
>>> gpg: Total number processed: 2
>>> gpg:              unchanged: 2
>>>
>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz.asc
>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:16 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>> "
>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>> owner.
>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>>>
>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip.asc
>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:07 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>> "
>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>> owner.
>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>>>
>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc
>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:59 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>> "
>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>> owner.
>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>>>
>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip.asc
>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:41 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>> "
>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>> owner.
>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann%
>>>
>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% cat *.md5
>>> C7CA5B01ADC5A785F63ED559169B4390 
>>> *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
>>> CF1744BF9ACF2EFD17F705A875691B02 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip
>>> D134D3F1D01060F2B6800FB19572A576 
>>> *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>> BA2F388B9AF5E66FC0F1437C98EDF846 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip
>>>
>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% md5sum 
>>> *-bin*.tar.gz *-bin*.zip *-src*.tar.gz *-src*.zip
>>> c7ca5b01adc5a785f63ed559169b4390  
>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
>>> cf1744bf9acf2efd17f705a875691b02  apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip
>>> d134d3f1d01060f2b6800fb19572a576  
>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>> ba2f388b9af5e66fc0f1437c98edf846  apache-manifoldcf-

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating, RC8

[Karl Wright]

It looks like we're going to go ahead and release.
I'll post a [RESULT][VOTE] message when that is certain.
Karl

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> About  5 hours after ant voted, a user discovered that a problem we'd
> thought was fixed in RC8 is still in fact present, albeit in a
> slightly different form.  The community is trying to figure out if
> this should mean a new RC or not.  We did triage the problem initially
> as a release blocker.
>
> The main downside of a new RC is getting a quorum to evaluate and vote
> on it in the incubator.  This part of the process took two weeks for
> RC8.  The issue is CONNECTORS-148.  Any advice is welcome.  I believe
> that the incubator vote is technically still open.
>
> Thanks,
> Karl
>
> On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 4:20 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>> +1
>>
>>   ...ant
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>> Thanks for the votes!  Still need one more binding +1...
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>  wrote:
>>>> Hi Karl,
>>>>
>>>> +1 from me (binding).
>>>>
>>>> Signatures check out:
>>>>
>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --import 
>>>> *.KEYS
>>>> gpg: key 03824582: "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>> " not changed
>>>> gpg: key FE045966: "Grant Ingersoll (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>> " not changed
>>>> gpg: Total number processed: 2
>>>> gpg:              unchanged: 2
>>>>
>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz.asc
>>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:16 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>> "
>>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>>> owner.
>>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>>>>
>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip.asc
>>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:07 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>> "
>>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>>> owner.
>>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>>>>
>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc
>>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:59 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>> "
>>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>>> owner.
>>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>>>>
>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip.asc
>>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:41 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>> "
>>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>>> owner.
>>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 4582
>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann%
>>>>
>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% cat *.md5
>>>> C7CA5B01ADC5A785F63ED559169B4390 
>>>> *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
>>>> CF1744BF9ACF2EFD17F705A875691B02 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip
>>>> D134D3F1D01060F2B6800FB19572A576 
>>>> *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>>> BA2F388B9AF5E66FC0F1437C98EDF846 *apache-manif

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating, RC8

[Karl Wright]

There were three binding +1's, and nothing else.  Release passes!
Karl

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> It looks like we're going to go ahead and release.
> I'll post a [RESULT][VOTE] message when that is certain.
> Karl
>
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> About  5 hours after ant voted, a user discovered that a problem we'd
>> thought was fixed in RC8 is still in fact present, albeit in a
>> slightly different form.  The community is trying to figure out if
>> this should mean a new RC or not.  We did triage the problem initially
>> as a release blocker.
>>
>> The main downside of a new RC is getting a quorum to evaluate and vote
>> on it in the incubator.  This part of the process took two weeks for
>> RC8.  The issue is CONNECTORS-148.  Any advice is welcome.  I believe
>> that the incubator vote is technically still open.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Karl
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 4:20 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>>   ...ant
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the votes!  Still need one more binding +1...
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>> Hi Karl,
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 from me (binding).
>>>>>
>>>>> Signatures check out:
>>>>>
>>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --import 
>>>>> *.KEYS
>>>>> gpg: key 03824582: "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>>> " not changed
>>>>> gpg: key FE045966: "Grant Ingersoll (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>>> " not changed
>>>>> gpg: Total number processed: 2
>>>>> gpg:              unchanged: 2
>>>>>
>>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz.asc
>>>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:16 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>>> "
>>>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>>>> owner.
>>>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
>>>>> 4582
>>>>>
>>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip.asc
>>>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:07 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>>> "
>>>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>>>> owner.
>>>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
>>>>> 4582
>>>>>
>>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc
>>>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:59 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>>> "
>>>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>>>> owner.
>>>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
>>>>> 4582
>>>>>
>>>>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>>>>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip.asc
>>>>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:41 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
>>>>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>>>>> "
>>>>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>>>>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>>>>> owner.
>>>>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
>>>>> 4582
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating, RC8

[Karl Wright]

:-)

Well, the decision of the community was to go ahead with the current
artifact, FWIW.  It should be replicating as we speak.

Thanks anyway, though!
Karl

On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Upayavira  wrote:
> If you feel you need to re-release, then so be it.
>
> However, you if can provide specific information about what has changed
> since the last RC, that can make voting easier.
>
> Especially seeing as Incubator PMC members are voting on the fact that
> the release is legally correct, not so much that it actually works.
>
> In which case, a simple diff between the previous RC and a current one
> would show that nothing (legally) material has changed and thereby lead
> to an easy +1 vote, from someone who has voted previously.
>
> Upayavira, who accepts that by replying like this he is saying he'll
> attempt to review the next RC
>
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 19:56 -0500, "Karl Wright" 
> wrote:
>> About  5 hours after ant voted, a user discovered that a problem we'd
>> thought was fixed in RC8 is still in fact present, albeit in a
>> slightly different form.  The community is trying to figure out if
>> this should mean a new RC or not.  We did triage the problem initially
>> as a release blocker.
>>
>> The main downside of a new RC is getting a quorum to evaluate and vote
>> on it in the incubator.  This part of the process took two weeks for
>> RC8.  The issue is CONNECTORS-148.  Any advice is welcome.  I believe
>> that the incubator vote is technically still open.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Karl
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 4:20 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>> > +1
>> >
>> >   ...ant
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> >> Thanks for the votes!  Still need one more binding +1...
>> >> Karl
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>> >>  wrote:
>> >>> Hi Karl,
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 from me (binding).
>> >>>
>> >>> Signatures check out:
>> >>>
>> >>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --import 
>> >>> *.KEYS
>> >>> gpg: key 03824582: "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>> >>> " not changed
>> >>> gpg: key FE045966: "Grant Ingersoll (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>> >>> " not changed
>> >>> gpg: Total number processed: 2
>> >>> gpg:              unchanged: 2
>> >>>
>> >>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>> >>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz.asc
>> >>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:16 2011 PST using RSA key ID 
>> >>> 03824582
>> >>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>> >>> "
>> >>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>> >>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>> >>> owner.
>> >>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
>> >>> 4582
>> >>>
>> >>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>> >>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip.asc
>> >>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:07 2011 PST using RSA key ID 
>> >>> 03824582
>> >>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>> >>> "
>> >>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>> >>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>> >>> owner.
>> >>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
>> >>> 4582
>> >>>
>> >>> [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
>> >>> apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc
>> >>> gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:59 2011 PST using RSA key ID 
>> >>> 03824582
>> >>> gpg: Good signature from "Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
>> >>> "
>> >>> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
>> >>> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
>> >>> owner.
>> >>> Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 

[ANNOUNCE] Release of ManifoldCF 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

ManifoldCF 0.1-incubating has been released.

In a short while the mirrors should all have the release available for
download.  The site has also been updated, and that will be
replicating within 24 hours also.

After this time tomorrow, please visit the download page
(http://incubator.apache.org/connectors/download.html) for important
caveats regarding the release.

Thanks,
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Erlend Garåsen, voted to be a committer for ManifoldCF, still waiting for an Apache account

[Karl Wright]

Hi folks,

About 3 weeks ago I cc'd the results of the ManifoldCF PPMC vote on
Erlend to priv...@incubator.apache.org, as per the instructions, but
he still has not received any communication about an Apache account
and is thus blocked from doing committer related activities.  Is there
some process that we missed?

Thanks,
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Vote has passed the PPMC for this release candidate.

The RC2 of the ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating release is now up on
http://people.apache.org/~kwright.  The svn tag is at
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.2-incubating-RC2.

Please vote!

Thanks,
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Hi again,

Just to be clear, the ManifoldCF podling needs incubator consideration
of the release candidate in order to do the release, and three binding
+1 votes.  Any chance that this might happen?

Karl

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> Vote has passed the PPMC for this release candidate.
>
> The RC2 of the ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating release is now up on
> http://people.apache.org/~kwright.  The svn tag is at
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.2-incubating-RC2.
>
> Please vote!
>
> Thanks,
> Karl
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Grant Ingersoll granted his +1 to the release.  There were 4 binding
PPMC +1's in all.

Karl

On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Marvin Humphrey  wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 12:57:03PM -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>> Just to be clear, the ManifoldCF podling needs incubator consideration
>> of the release candidate in order to do the release, and three binding
>> +1 votes.  Any chance that this might happen?
>
>> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> > Vote has passed the PPMC for this release candidate.
>
> How many binding votes from Incubator PMC members have you gotten so far?  Did
> ManifoldCF's Mentors weigh in during the PPMC vote?
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Hi - just to clarify, we did not include the HTTPD extension in the
release, but it remains available in source control for backwards
compatibility.  Most people use the Active Directory Authority at the
moment.  But thank you for compiling it.

As for the RAT report, the skins question is known and a ticket is
open for that.  The other files are temporary files resulting from
your test run and I will open a ticket to exclude those from the
rat-source target.

We've still received zero binding evaluations from incubator for this
release, FWIW.

Karl



On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Marvin Humphrey  wrote:
> On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 12:57:03PM -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>> Just to be clear, the ManifoldCF podling needs incubator consideration
>> of the release candidate in order to do the release, and three binding
>> +1 votes.  Any chance that this might happen?
>
> Since I'm only a podling committer and not an Incubator PMC member, I can't
> offer a binding vote.  Nevertheless, I've performed some superficial QC on the
> release candidate.
>
>  * All signatures and sums check out, including for the binary artifacts.
>  * "ant test" succeeds on the expanded src.tar.gz tarball on my OS X laptop.
>  * The HTTPD extension builds after a Makefile hack (explained below).
>  * "ant clean" properly cleans up after "ant test".
>  * There's a problem with line endings in the src.tar.gz archive.
>
> The HTTPD module, mod_authz_annotate, built successfully, but only after I
> hacked the Makefile to use "apxs" instead of "apxs2".  Not a blocker, IMO, but
> now you know. :)  Also, neither "make clean" nor "ant clean" cleans up all
> build detritus -- these got left behind:
>
>    mod_authz_annotate.la
>    mod_authz_annotate.lo
>    mod_authz_annotate.o
>    mod_authz_annotate.slo
>
> I was surprised to find that most of the text files in the src.tar.gz have
> Windows line endings.  That's ugly, but not a blocker IMO.  It looks like they
> have the proper settings in Subversion -- e.g. for README.txt, svn:eol-style
> is "native" -- so it seems the problem arose because the tar.gz package was
> prepared on a Windows box.  Maybe try preparing the tar.gz on something
> unixish in the future.
>
> Lastly, I ran "ant rat-sources", and though it declared "BUILD SUCCESSFUL",
> RAT flagged 8 files:
>
>    connectors/filesystem/test-output-postgresql/logging.ini
>    connectors/filesystem/test-output-postgresql/manifoldcf.log
>    connectors/filesystem/test-output-postgresql/properties.xml
>    framework/test-output-postgresql/logging.ini
>    framework/test-output-postgresql/manifoldcf.log
>    framework/test-output-postgresql/properties.xml
>    site/src/documentation/skins/common/xslt/html/split.xsl
>    site/src/documentation/skins/lucene/note.txt
>
> I'd suggest presenting a clean RAT report next time you call a vote on an RC 
> to
> make things easier on everybody.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Erlend Garåsen, voted to be a committer for ManifoldCF, still waiting for an Apache account

[Karl Wright]

One of our mentors, Grant Ingersoll, officially requested an account
for Erlend about two weeks ago.  There has still been no activity.  Is
there any other process step we might have missed?

Karl

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Gavin McDonald  wrote:
>
>
>> -Original Message-----
>> From: Karl Wright [mailto:daddy...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 27 April 2011 7:04 AM
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org; Erlend Garåsen
>> Subject: Erlend Garåsen, voted to be a committer for ManifoldCF, still
> waiting
>> for an Apache account
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> About 3 weeks ago I cc'd the results of the ManifoldCF PPMC vote on Erlend
>> to priv...@incubator.apache.org, as per the instructions, but he still has
> not
>> received any communication about an Apache account and is thus blocked
>> from doing committer related activities.  Is there some process that we
>> missed?
>
> Yes, the Mentors for ManifoldCF should be asking root@ for the acct, to date
> that
> has not happened. No request means no acct.
>
> Gav...
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Karl
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

We effectively have only one active mentor.  There were others, of
course, when the project entered incubation, but they have not stepped
up to date in any capacity.  And Grant, as you probably know, has
bazillions of other responsibilities.  It may be worth trying to find
new mentors to join ManifoldCF, since this is probably limiting our
chances of graduation at this point.  Does this ever happen (that
anyone is aware of)?

Karl

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:44 AM, ant elder  wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>
>> We've still received zero binding evaluations from incubator for this
>> release, FWIW.
>>
>
> I think a problem might be that its so big so a little daunting to
> review, I did start having a look but haven't enough time yet, I'll
> try to find some time in the next few days. You should pester your
> mentors to vote as thats one of their duties they accepted when
> signing up to be a mentor.
>
>   ...ant
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: ManifoldCF mentors (was Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2)

[Karl Wright]

Thanks for the information.  I can offer one pot of gold (at end of
rainbow, of course), but that's all I've got. ;-)
Seriously, if anyone is interested in mentoring ManifoldCF, please let
me know.  If I have a name or two I'll throw it open for discussion on
the connectors-private list.

Thanks!
Karl



On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Upayavira  wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 09 May 2011 05:19 -0400, "Karl Wright" 
> wrote:
>> We effectively have only one active mentor.  There were others, of
>> course, when the project entered incubation, but they have not stepped
>> up to date in any capacity.  And Grant, as you probably know, has
>> bazillions of other responsibilities.  It may be worth trying to find
>> new mentors to join ManifoldCF, since this is probably limiting our
>> chances of graduation at this point.  Does this ever happen (that
>> anyone is aware of)?
>
> The process for finding new mentors is much the same as it was when
> entering the incubator. Ask for volunteers, ask possible candidates,
> offer large sums of money (oh, no, we're not supposed to do that...).
>
> Assuming a possible mentor is a member of the Incubator PMC, then their
> becoming a mentor for your project is as simple as informing the
> Incubator PMC and updating the status page.
>
> Upayavira
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: ManifoldCF mentors (was Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2)

[Karl Wright]

Oh - and in case any potential mentors lurking out there would like to
know what ManifoldCF really does, and where it fits in in the broader
picture, you can look at the first chapter of ManifoldCF in Action for
free here: http://www.manning.com/wright/ .  This describes the
problem space pretty well, I think.

Long-term future plans involve extending ManifoldCF so it can scale in
a distributed fashion, which will require initial work to use
Zookeeper as the cross-process synchronization mechanism, as well as
building a distributed queue across multiple database instances.
Also, ManifoldCF has rather unique requirements as far as testing
infrastructure is concerned, which could arguably lead to other
spinoff Apache projects someday.

Please contact me if you're interested!

Karl


On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> Thanks for the information.  I can offer one pot of gold (at end of
> rainbow, of course), but that's all I've got. ;-)
> Seriously, if anyone is interested in mentoring ManifoldCF, please let
> me know.  If I have a name or two I'll throw it open for discussion on
> the connectors-private list.
>
> Thanks!
> Karl
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Upayavira  wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 09 May 2011 05:19 -0400, "Karl Wright" 
>> wrote:
>>> We effectively have only one active mentor.  There were others, of
>>> course, when the project entered incubation, but they have not stepped
>>> up to date in any capacity.  And Grant, as you probably know, has
>>> bazillions of other responsibilities.  It may be worth trying to find
>>> new mentors to join ManifoldCF, since this is probably limiting our
>>> chances of graduation at this point.  Does this ever happen (that
>>> anyone is aware of)?
>>
>> The process for finding new mentors is much the same as it was when
>> entering the incubator. Ask for volunteers, ask possible candidates,
>> offer large sums of money (oh, no, we're not supposed to do that...).
>>
>> Assuming a possible mentor is a member of the Incubator PMC, then their
>> becoming a mentor for your project is as simple as informing the
>> Incubator PMC and updating the status page.
>>
>> Upayavira
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[RESULT][VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Vote: Three +1's, no -1's.

Vote passes.
Karl

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> Vote has passed the PPMC for this release candidate.
>
> The RC2 of the ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating release is now up on
> http://people.apache.org/~kwright.  The svn tag is at
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.2-incubating-RC2.
>
> Please vote!
>
> Thanks,
> Karl
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[ANNOUNCE] ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating released!

[Karl Wright]

Thanks to all that voted!
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

ManifoldCF: Another mentor needed?

[Karl Wright]

Hi,

The ManifoldCF project just lost Grant Ingersoll as a mentor, who
resigned last Tuesday.  ManifoldCF has been incubating since January
2010 and basically provides a framework and connectors for
synchronizing content from a set of repositories to a set of target
search engines, with security.  Although Tommaso Teofili joined
recently, we could really use the full complement of three mentors, so
I was wondering if there are any additional interested parties wanting
to function in this capacity for ManifoldCF.

Please let us know!
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Anybody know legality of saaj-impl-1.3.jar?

[Karl Wright]

Hi all,

The ManifoldCF has had a connector contributed that is based on Apache
Chemistry.  The dependencies of Apache Chemistry include
activation-1.1.jar and saaj-impl-1.3.jar, both of which seem to be
from Sun, and are (I believe) covered by the Sun/Oracle license.  I
was told a while back that activation.jar could not be included in MCF
for this reason, but that there was a geronimo-activation.jar
available instead, which is what ManifoldCF uses.  But I don't know
about saaj-impl.

(a) Does anyone know if there's an Apache-licensed replacement for saaj-impl?
(b) Should somebody tell Chemistry that they may have a license problem?

Thanks!
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Anybody know legality of saaj-impl-1.3.jar?

[Karl Wright]

Yes, of course, I asked the contributor to post on your list. ;-)  But
it looks like that's not necessary now.

Karl

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Florent Guillaume  wrote:
> Yes, you should Cc the chemistry list to tell us about it :)
> Maybe legal@ also?
>
> Florent
>
> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The ManifoldCF has had a connector contributed that is based on Apache
>> Chemistry.  The dependencies of Apache Chemistry include
>> activation-1.1.jar and saaj-impl-1.3.jar, both of which seem to be
>> from Sun, and are (I believe) covered by the Sun/Oracle license.  I
>> was told a while back that activation.jar could not be included in MCF
>> for this reason, but that there was a geronimo-activation.jar
>> available instead, which is what ManifoldCF uses.  But I don't know
>> about saaj-impl.
>>
>> (a) Does anyone know if there's an Apache-licensed replacement for saaj-impl?
>> (b) Should somebody tell Chemistry that they may have a license problem?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Karl
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Florent Guillaume, Director of R&D, Nuxeo
> Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
> http://www.nuxeo.com   http://www.nuxeo.org   +33 1 40 33 79 87
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Anybody know legality of saaj-impl-1.3.jar?

[Karl Wright]

OK - so now I'm getting conflicting advice.  Somebody went through a
fair bit of effort to implement the geronimo versions of all these
packages, including saaj-impl.  Are you saying that Sun/Oracle
recently changed the licensing terms sufficiently that substituting
the geronimo jars is no longer necessary?  If so, what caveats do I
need to include in NOTICE.txt and LICENSE.txt, or should I just copy
whatever Chemistry does?

Karl

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Daniel Kulp  wrote:
> On Thursday, July 07, 2011 9:08:52 AM Karl Wright wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The ManifoldCF has had a connector contributed that is based on Apache
>> Chemistry.  The dependencies of Apache Chemistry include
>> activation-1.1.jar and saaj-impl-1.3.jar, both of which seem to be
>> from Sun, and are (I believe) covered by the Sun/Oracle license.  I
>> was told a while back that activation.jar could not be included in MCF
>> for this reason, but that there was a geronimo-activation.jar
>> available instead, which is what ManifoldCF uses.  But I don't know
>> about saaj-impl.
>
> The recent versions of most of that stuff is CDDL which is OK (category b
> license) for shipping the binaries.     Definitely use 1.3.2 though:
>
> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/sun/xml/messaging/saaj/saaj-impl/1.3.2/
>
>
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>>
>> (a) Does anyone know if there's an Apache-licensed replacement for
>> saaj-impl? (b) Should somebody tell Chemistry that they may have a license
>> problem?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Karl
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dk...@apache.org
> http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Anybody know legality of saaj-impl-1.3.jar?

[Karl Wright]

Thanks - that's sufficient as far as I am concerned. ;-)
Karl

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Ioannis Canellos  wrote:
> There is no conflict. I just told you that Geronimo provides its own specs,
> which are definitely safe to use. I don't know how safe it is to use the
> original ones, but I would trust Dan.
>
> --
> *Ioannis Canellos*
> *
>  http://iocanel.blogspot.com
>
> Apache Karaf  Committer & PMC
> Apache ServiceMix   Committer
> *
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating?

[Karl Wright]

The ManifoldCF community has voted to release ManifoldCF
0.3-incubating RC1.  Now it is your turn to vote!  You can pick up the
artifact at http://people.apache.org/~kwright, or if you want to look
at the svn tag it's at
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.3-incubating-RC1.

Thanks!
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating?

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me, of course, also (non-binding)

Karl

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 wrote:
> +1 (binding)
> Tommaso
>
>
>
> Il giorno 13/set/2011, alle ore 19:33, Karl Wright  ha 
> scritto:
>
>> The ManifoldCF community has voted to release ManifoldCF
>> 0.3-incubating RC1.  Now it is your turn to vote!  You can pick up the
>> artifact at http://people.apache.org/~kwright, or if you want to look
>> at the svn tag it's at
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.3-incubating-RC1.
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Karl
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating?

[Karl Wright]

If I count correctly, we still need one more binding +1.  ManifoldCF
only has two mentors, so this vote will have to come from incubator
community at large.  But we'd also love to have a third mentor!

Karl

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Jukka Zitting  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> The ManifoldCF community has voted to release ManifoldCF
>> 0.3-incubating RC1.  Now it is your turn to vote!  You can pick up the
>> artifact at http://people.apache.org/~kwright, or if you want to look
>> at the svn tag it's at
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.3-incubating-RC1.
>
> +1 looks good
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[RESULT][VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating?

[Karl Wright]

Three binding +1's, >72 hours.  Vote passes!

A big "thanks" to all that voted too... ;-)

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[ANNOUNCE] Announcing general availability of Apache ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating!

[Karl Wright]

Thanks to all who put time and effort into this release!

The site and download mirrors should update in a day or so, but if you
cannot wait, you can download the release in the interim from
http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/manifoldcf.

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Mailing list membership counts

[Karl Wright]

Hi folks,

I'm trying to get a membership count for the ManifoldCF member lists.
I'm a moderator for these, and at one point I was able to figure out
how to do it, but the reference that the "committers" page sends you
to ("the svn "committers" project, under /doc/resources.txt") doesn't
seem to exist anymore.  Furthermore, sending mail to
connectors-dev-l...@incubator.apache.org claims I'm not a moderator,
even though I clearly am, and I'm certain I'm using the right source
email account.  Is there a reference I can look at, or has something
changed?

Thanks
Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Projects failing to repoirt for October - appropriate actions?

[Karl Wright]

ManifoldCF submitted a report in September.  I'm not sure why this was
not logged.

Karl

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Noel J. Bergman  wrote:
> On most months, I have to chase down missing reports.
>
> ETCH, HAMA, HCATALOG (managed to do a release, though), KATO, MANIFOLDCF
> (also managed to do a release, though), RAT and WAVE all failed to report
> this month.
>
> RAT was discussing graduation, but still needs to report.  Two others were
> active enough to put out releases, but failed to report.  Wave has been
> active enough to discuss their next steps, but failed to report.
>
> What should be done with these projects?  Which one(s) should be retired?
>
>        --- Noel
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: October 2011 Incubator Board Report

[Karl Wright]

ManifoldCF is also listed as March, June, September, and December on
the referenced page.

Karl

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Michael Fitzner
 wrote:
> I think some projects are wrong scheduled for the „October 2011
> Incubator Board Report“ The current schedule plan
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ReportingSchedule shows that projects
> like Etch, Hama, Hcatalog are in the months March, June, September,
> December and not in October. It would be greate if someone could
> correct this in the October report.
>
> The Etch project had its report in September; see
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2011 and
> http://incubator.apache.org/clutch.html
>
> If there was a decision to report in October too, we would like to
> apologise for missing it.
>
> Thanks
> Michael F. (Apache Etch)
>
> 2011/10/18 Noel J. Bergman :
>> Most of the general discussion on the Incubator list over the past month was
>> how to improve the usability of the Incubator web-site.
>>
>> S4 (Simple Scalable Streaming System) -- a general-purpose, distributed,
>> scalable, partially fault-tolerant, pluggable platform that allows
>> programmers to easily develop applications for processing continuous,
>> unbounded streams of data -- was voted to begin Incubation.
>>
>> Any23 (Anything To Triples) -- a Java library, a Web service and a set of
>> command line tools to extract and validate structured data in RDF format
>> from a variety of Web documents and markup formats -- was voted to begin
>> Incubation.
>>
>> Apache DirectMemory -- a multi-layered cache implementation featuring
>> off-heap memory storage (ala Terracotta BigMemory) to enable caching of Java
>> objects without degrading JVM performance -- was voted to begin Incubation.
>>
>> Apache Callback (derived from PhonaGap) -- a platform for building native
>> (Apple iOS, Google Android, RIM BlackBerry, Microsoft Windows Phone 7, HP
>> webOS, Nokia Symbian and Samsung Bada) mobile applications using HTML, CSS
>> and JavaScript -- was voted to begin Incubation.
>>
>> DeltaCloud is currently voting on graduation from the Incubator.  ACE is
>> also discussing graduation.
>>
>> ETCH, HAMA, HCATALOG (managed to do a release, though), KATO, MANIFOLDCF
>> (also managed to do a release, though), RAT and WAVE all failed to report
>> this month.  The Chair is raising the issue of what to do with these
>> projects.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Accumulo
>>
>> Accumulo is a sorted, distributed key/value store based on BigTable's
>> design.  Accumulo entered incubation in September 2011.
>>
>> In the move towards graduation, we must address:
>> 1. Learning Apache procedures
>> 2. Creating releases
>> 3. Building a community
>>
>> Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be aware
>> of:
>> Discussion is ongoing as to whether agreements other than ICLAs are needed
>> or desirable for people employed by the US government to make contributions
>> to Apache (see LEGAL-100).
>>
>> Developments since entering incubation:
>> * mailing lists created
>> * JIRA created
>> * SVN directory and git mirror created
>> * accounts for initial committers created
>> * ICLAs and Software Grant filed
>> * CMS-ready site begun
>> * initial code uploaded
>> * Jenkins build created
>> * ReviewBoard group created
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> ACE
>>
>> Apache ACE is a software distribution framework that allows you to centrally
>> manage and distribute software components, configuration data and other
>> artifacts to target systems. ACE started incubation on April 24th 2009.
>>
>> There are currently no issues requiring board or Incubator PMC attention.
>>
>> Community:
>>  * We've got a lot of great feedback and patches from the community.
>>  * There have been talks with the jclouds (we use them) as well as the
>> Amdatu (they use us) open source projects.
>>
>> Software:
>>  * We now have a REST client API.
>>  * The management agent has been extended.
>>  * Karaf features were added.
>>  * We have a server side resolver based on Apache Felix.
>>
>> Licensing and other issues:
>>  * None at the moment.
>>
>> Things to resolve prior to graduation:
>>  * We hope this is our very last board report as we think we're ready for
>> graduation now!
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Ambari
>>
>> Ambari is monitoring, administration and lifecycle management project for
>> Apache Hadoop clusters.
>>
>>  * Incubating since 30 August 2011.
>>  * Mailing lists created and mentors subscribed.
>>  * Confluence created.
>>  * Initial code committed.
>>  * Site created.
>>  * Code grant received.
>>  * Development proceeding actively.
>>  * RAT added to pom and report is clean.
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> Any23
>>
>> Anything To Triples (shortly Any23) defined as a Java library, a Web service
>> and a set of command line tools to extract and validate structured data in
>> RDF format from a variety of Web documents and markup formats. Any23 is what

Re: Lucene Connector Framework Kickoff

[Karl Wright]

Hi Grant,

For those of us new to working with apache, could you give a quick overview of the best way to communicate among group members? 
 Specifically, what sorts of posts should be sent to gene...@incubator, and what sorts should go to gene...@lucene?  Also, I am 
in the process of determining the strategy and the exact list of files for the software grant from MetaCarta, and I'd love to 
get people's feedback as to what should be included, and how.  What list would be appropriate for that?  Should we set one up?


Thanks again,
Karl Wright

Grant Ingersoll wrote:

Hi All,

(Please keep replies to general@incubator.apache.org)

I opened the following JIRA issues for starting LCF:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2431
I need two volunteers from the list of committers to be moderators.  
Please signify your willingness to be a committer by adding your name to the 
JIRA ticket.

Confluence Wiki:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2432

JIRA project
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-2433


I added SVN at:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/

The following people need to submit iCLAs:
Brian Pinkerton
Karl Wright (kwright at metacarta)
Josiah Strandberg (jstrandberg at metacarta)
Ken Baker (bakerkj at metacarta)
Marc Meadows (mam at metacarta)

Once they are on file, I can request accounts.

Everyone else should have permission to commit, as they are existing committers.

Cheers,
Grant



--
Karl Wright
Software Engineer

MetaCarta, Inc.
350 Massachusetts Avenue, 4th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA

(617)-301-5511

www.metacarta.com <http://www.metacarta.com>
Where to find it.

This message may contain privileged, proprietary, and otherwise private
information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
sender immediately.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Name change from "Lucene Connectors Framework" to "Apache Connectors Framework"

[Karl Wright]

FWIW, helium is the output product of a sun-like star, not the fuel.  That
would be hydrogen.

Karl

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:

> It seems to me that the pivotal problem here is the word connector. On
> the one hand, it could mean almost anything to almost anyone. On the
> other hand, it has a specific denotation in the vicinity of httpd.
> Everything at Apache is in the vicinity of httpd.
>
> I'd offer the following 'made-up' options, all following Apache:
>
>  - manifold  (many connections)
>  - omnivore (eats anything)
>  - rapunzel (spins straw into gold)
>  - diogenes (seeking for something)
>  - lantern (ditto)
>  - helium (fuel for Solr)
>
> The whole question of brand management strikes me as interesting: is
> it, in fact, the job of the incubator PMC to groom the Apache branding
> portfolio by guiding new projects towards better names? Is that in our
> charter, or should we, as Chris suggests, defer to someone else for
> problems in this area.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>  wrote:
> > Guys,
> >
> > If I may: since we're discussing marks, why not post to trademarks@ and
> ask Shane and crew to weigh in? Maybe you have already, but if so, I haven't
> seen that discussion mentioned over here on gene...@incubator.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > On 8/30/10 10:03 AM, "Grant Ignersoll"  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 27, 2010, at 12:15 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> >> To try to illustrate my thinking rather than push a name down your
> throat...
> >> Open ConnectorFramework/OpenConnectorFramework/OpenCF  OK, since you've
> added a branding word.  Not ideal since the purpose appears overly broad
> >> Content Connector Framework/ContentConnectorFramework/CCF OK, since
> you've clarified the scope.  Not ideal since has no branding word.
> >> OpenContentConnectorFramework/OpenCCF better since it clarifies the
> scope and includes a branding word.
> >
> > So, the word "open" somehow alleviates your concern?  I don't get that.
>  If your objection is that it comes across as being _the_ Apache connector
> library, then how does "Open" modulate that?  It's still the Apache Open
> Connector Framework.  It's still descriptive and still implies it's the one.
>  Besides, it's the ASF, isn't "Open" implied/redundant?  We would never have
> the Apache Closed Connector Framework, right?
> >
> > Likewise, the word Content implies the same "only" status, albeit here I
> will give you that it distinguishes it from Tomcat Connector somewhat,
> although the Tomcat Connector is just that, the Tomcat connector.  However,
> I still don't buy that it is a "branding" word.  Content is pretty much
> meaningless.  Everything is content.  I have no doubt that we could write a
> plugin for ACF that connected to Tomcat and got Content out of it.  Heck, we
> already do. It's called a web crawler.
> >
> > So, that leaves us, in my mind w/ the option of some made up name or we
> stick w/ ACF.  I'm all for a made up one if someone comes up with one, I
> just don't know what it is and no one in the community seems to have one
> either.  ACF fits and the community likes it.  It's not unprecedented at the
> ASF and I don't think it is confusing with Tomcat Connector.
> >
> > At any rate, the community would like some resolution.  Should I just
> call an official vote on ACF and if it loses then we will go back to the
> drawing board?
> >
> > -Grant
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ++
> > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> > Senior Computer Scientist
> > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> > Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> > Email: chris.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov
> > WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> > ++
> > Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> > ++
> >
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Change name of Lucene Connectors Framework to Apache Connectors Framework

[Karl Wright]

Perhaps some clarification is in order, explaining where we are and how we
got here, and the procedures the podling followed to come up with the
current proposal.  I especially want to address the concern that we've been
ignoring the advice of the incubator.

Here is a short history, for those unfamiliar:

(1) Lucene Connectors Framework was voted into incubation in January of this
year, ostensibly as a future subproject of Lucene.
(2) At Lucene/Solr Eurocon, in May, Grant let it be known that in his (and
other people's) opinion, LCF was too broad to be properly just a Lucene
subproject, and that its status as a planned Lucene subproject would
probably need to change.
(3) In August, I was approached to write a book on this project, and I
realized that that would be very difficult to do if the name issue was not
settled.  Grant proposed that we simply go from LCF to ACF at that time, and
posted accordingly to this group.  He received several positive responses,
and only one that raised any concerns.  After a week's delay, we presumed
that all was well, and went ahead with an extensive renaming exercise.
(4) In late August, several folks from this list raised strong objections to
the name.  Our podling recognized that, and began gathering many suggestions
for names both descriptive and abstract.  It became apparent to me at that
time that the Apache community is actually quite strongly divided between
those who prefer abstract names and those who prefer descriptive ones.
Indeed, the Apache naming guidelines also play homage to both approaches.
(5) In early September, the gathered names were put to a vote on the
connectors-dev list.  The number of naming candidates was roughly 15, and
included descriptive names, abstract names, and animal names - the best we
could come up with in two weeks' worth of discussion.  Everyone on that list
was informed of the incubator concerns about descriptive names.  Everyone
was also informed that Apache is always the first part of the name.
Nevertheless, the final results still had Apache Connectors Framework as the
lead choice.  Given the informal response this choice had received before,
Grant chose to present it for a formal vote, with the understanding that
should it fail, we would then call votes on other high-scoring candidates
from the voted list.

Hope this helps.  If our procedures seem incorrect, please advise.

Karl



On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 8:06 AM, James Carman wrote:

> I'm -1 (don't know if it's binding or not.  I requested to join the
> PMC, but didn't hear anything back).  I think the name is too general.
>  Why not just choose some animal name or something like everyone else
> is doing?
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Grant Ingersoll 
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > After much debate both here and on the connectors mailing list, the LCF
> community has voted (see
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-connectors-dev/201008.mbox/browser)
> and would like to officially change our name to be the "Apache Connectors
> Framework".  We would like the Incubator PMC to vote to make this official.
> >
> > [] +1 Change the Lucene Connector Framework to the Apache Connector
> Framework
> > [] 0 Don't care
> > [] -1 Don't change it
> >
> > Since this is a procedural vote (
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html), it is a majority rule vote
> with binding votes coming from IPMC members.  The vote is open for 72 hours.
> >
> > Here's my +1 (binding).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Grant
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Change name of Lucene Connectors Framework to Apache Connectors Framework

[Karl Wright]

There may be trademark issues with Manifold, so although it enjoys support
in the community, it may be unacceptable for that reason.  Also, it was not
the actual winner of the vote, and so we do need to go through the proper
process, seems to me.  If ACF is rejected, then we'll have to properly vette
Apache Manifold as the next step.

http://www.manifold.net/index.shtml

Karl

On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 8:57 AM, ant elder  wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>
> > Grant proposed that we simply go from LCF to ACF at that time, and
> > posted accordingly to this group.  He received several positive
> responses,
> > and only one that raised any concerns.  After a week's delay, we presumed
> > that all was well,
>
> That may be the cause of all this - there was a concern raised but
> instead of being taken on board it was ignored.
>
> Looking at the vote result of options [1] Apache Manifold is the
> second highest choice and has a good amount of support and is far less
> contentious than ACF so why not just go with that?
>
> I agree with Upayavira's comment [2] - while it may not be down to the
> IPMC to veto a name the board may well do so. So if you want to reduce
> the chance of a book title being messed up when the project goes TLP
> then i'd go with something abstract like Apache Manifold now (or else
> atleast ping the board now to see if they'll comment).
>
>   ...ant
>
> [1]
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-connectors-dev/201009.mbox/%3caanlktikd9fglbnyybrha6emr8ordzdlejaf85qvpf...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
> [2] http://apache.markmail.org/message/vbuq6hqfpuodouyp
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Role of Incubator PMC Votes

[Karl Wright]

Not only did we ask, we've asked more than once.

We're going that extra mile to call a vote to resolve this issue
specifically because there seems to be a wide range of opinion as to whether
the name is acceptable to the incubator, and by implication, the board.
It's quite clear that there's also a wide range of opinion as to whether or
not it's a good name or a bad name, but hopefully people who care deeply
about the quality of our name choice would find time to subscribe to
connectors-dev and vote on issues of this kind.  It seems to me that that is
the proper forum for discussions about naming aesthetics.

Karl


On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 1:54 PM, James Carman wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
> > I haven't followed this particular issue because it seems like a
> > slamdunk easy thing. If the podling wants to change their name, then
> > fine. Sounds easy enough. I would see no reason for anybody outside
> > the podling to -1 that choice, and might even say that I'd be upset if
> > they did...
>
> They asked.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Role of Incubator PMC Votes

[Karl Wright]

We obviously want the opinion, but I would claim we are looking for an
opinion less on aesthetics and more on whether or not the incubator or the
board would have technical objections to this name choice.  Would this
choice prevent graduation, for instance (in which case a -1 is certainly
warranted).

Karl

On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Kalle Korhonen
wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Greg Stein  wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 08:47, James Carman 
> wrote:
> > I haven't followed this particular issue because it seems like a
> > slamdunk easy thing. If the podling wants to change their name, then
> > fine. Sounds easy enough. I would see no reason for anybody outside
> > the podling to -1 that choice, and might even say that I'd be upset if
> > they did...
>
> Sure, the podling can change the name and it can be completely dealt
> with an internal matter. However, in this case, the name change was
> put up for a procedural/opinion vote on the incubator general list. As
> such, I might be upset if people are criticized for giving "the wrong
> vote". Most non-positive votes in the thread are non-binding so the
> project can ignore them if they like, but if you don't want the
> opinion, don't put it up for a vote.
>
> Kalle
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Latest copyright sign-off status [Was: Podlings needing copyright sign-off]

[Karl Wright]

The only software ever granted to ASF by MetaCarta was the code for
ManifoldCF.  It was not called ManifoldCF at that time, and was not
imported into svn with any "manifoldcf" strings anywhere.  But look
for package names that include "com.metacarta.agents",
"com.metacarta.crawler", "com.metacarta.core", etc.  If you find those
you can be assured it is the right grant.

Karl

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Craig L Russell
 wrote:
> I can verify that this software grant from Metacarta was dated 1st day of
> February, 2010.
>
> From the list of files, I cannot say exactly what the grant covers.
> ManifoldCF doesn't jump out of the list of files. There appear to be over a
> thousand files covered by the grant. The only "package name" that jumps is
> "metacarta", with sub-packages including core, agents, crawler,
>
> Hope this helps a bit.
>
> Craig
>
> On Nov 13, 2011, at 9:06 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote:
>
>> 2011/11/11 Henri Yandell 
>>
>>> Updating this, half of the items without sign-off in July are now
>>> signed off. I've updated the list below (though I've not yet added new
>>> PMCs since June).
>>>
>>> Here's the previous email:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Henri Yandell  wrote:

 Here's a list of the projects in the Incubator who need to sign off
 their copyright item; namely:

 "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
 been received.
 It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core
 code, and any
 new code produced by the project.  "
>>>
>>> Here's the latest list:
>>>
>>> 2008-09-29  olio
>>> 2009-02-09  kato
>>> 2009-02-13  stonehenge
>>> 2009-05-08  ace
>>> 2009-05-13  socialsite
>>> 2009-06-25  wink
>>> 2009-11-08  hise
>>> 2010-01-27  manifoldcf
>>>
>>
>> in the recorded grants file I can see:
>>
>> Software grant from Metacarta, Inc.
>>  ...
>>
>> and, as far as I know, this is the required paperwork for ManifoldCF
>> (previously knwon as Lucene Connectors Framework).
>>
>> Please let me know if I'm missing something.
>>
>> Tommaso
>>
>>
>>
>>> 2010-05-19  amber
>>> 2010-05-24  zetacomponents
>>> 2010-09-05  nuvem
>>> 2010-11-02  celix
>>> 2010-11-12  kitty
>>> 2010-11-24  stanbol
>>> 2010-12-02  jena
>>> 2010-12-02  opennlp
>>> 2011-06-13  openofficeorg
>>>
>>> Hen
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
> c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Incubator PMC/Board report for Dec 2011 ([ppmc])

[Karl Wright]

To our mentors,

The September 2011 report was not signed off.  Could one of you review
the current December report and sign off on it?  Thanks!

Karl

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Marvin  wrote:
>
>
> Dear podling,
>
> This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator 
> PMC.
> It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly
> board report.
>
> The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 21 December 2011, 10:00:00 PST. The 
> report
> for your podling will form a part of the Incubator PMC report. The Incubator 
> PMC
> requires your report to be submitted 2 weeks before the board meeting, to 
> allow
> sufficient time for review and submission (Wed, Dec 7th).
>
> Please submit your report with sufficient time to allow the incubator PMC, and
> subsequently board members to review and digest. Again, the very latest you
> should submit your report is 2 weeks prior to the board meeting.
>
> Thanks,
>
> The Apache Incubator PMC
>
> Submitting your Report
> --
>
> Your report should contain the following:
>
>  * Your project name
>  * A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of the 
> project
>   or necessarily of its field
>  * A list of the three most important issues to address in the move towards
>   graduation.
>  * Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be aware 
> of
>  * How has the community developed since the last report
>  * How has the project developed since the last report.
>
> This should be appended to the Incubator Wiki page at:
>
>  http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/2011
>
> Note: This manually populated. You may need to wait a little before this page 
> is
>      created from a template.
>
> Mentors
> ---
> Mentors should review reports for their project(s) and sign them off on the
> Incubator wiki page. Signing off reports shows that you are following the
> project - projects that are not signed may raise alarms for the Incubator PMC.
>
> Incubator PMC
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> Hello incubator,
>
> We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
> system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
> the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
> We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>
> Karl
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Jukka Zitting 
> Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
> 0.1-incubating
> To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> Hi,
> +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
> I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
> See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.
>
> BR,
> Jukka Zitting

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Hello incubator,

We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

Karl


-- Forwarded message --
From: Jukka Zitting 
Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


Hi,

+1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

I checked the apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
package, just statically review it.

One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
crypto code, we should remove the "Cryptographic Software Notice"
entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> Hello incubator,
>
> We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
> system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
> the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
> We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>
> Karl
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Jukka Zitting 
> Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
> Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
> apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
> To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> Hi,
>
> +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>
> I checked the 
> apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
> Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
> package, just statically review it.
>
> One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
> is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
> crypto code, we should remove the "Cryptographic Software Notice"
> entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
> in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Hello incubator,

We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

Karl


-- Forwarded message --
From: Jukka Zitting 
Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
0.1-incubating
To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


Hi,
+1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.

BR,
Jukka Zitting

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Hello incubator,

We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

Karl


-- Forwarded message --
From: Jukka Zitting 
Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
0.1-incubating
To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


Hi,

+1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.

Some comments, none blocking:

* The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
for the release.
* The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
svn tree.
* Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
ManifoldCF dependencies.

[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html

BR,

Jukka Zitting

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> Hello incubator,
>
> We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
> system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
> the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
> We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>
> Karl
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Jukka Zitting 
> Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
> 0.1-incubating
> To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> Hi,
>
> +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>
> I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
> package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.
>
> Some comments, none blocking:
>
> * The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
> for the release.
> * The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
> troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
> svn tree.
> * Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
> of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
> ManifoldCF dependencies.
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Q. Forks without concensus?; A. anytime / depends / never without agreement

[Karl Wright]

Any time a body of code is contributed from another source, it should
go through the standard Apache procedures, including a license grant
(if it's not open-source already).  But this is very different from
spinning off chunks of an existing incubator project.

For example, ManifoldCF is currently attempting to spin off three
subprojects.  Each of the subprojects is more tightly related in some
way to other projects than it is to ManifoldCF itself, and in an ideal
world these other projects would incorporate the subproject code
themselves.  Unfortunately, in two of the cases (plugins for two
versions of Lucene/Solr) the project has refused to include the code,
and in another case (a SharePoint plugin) the main "project" is not
open-sourced in the first place.

I would hope that there would be enough flexibility in the incubator
model to permit this kind of thing.  Just my two cents, nonbinding...

Karl

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Donald Whytock  wrote:
> It occurs to me that the ASF, in enforcing open-source licensing,
> becomes a source of free legal advice to the open-source community,
> whether it intends to or not...
>
> 1. Contribute a body of code to ASF.
>
> 2. "Is it legal for us to accept this?  Better run it past legal@."
>
> 3. Use acceptance of the contribution as certification that it can be
> used by the contributor.
>
> Just sayin'.  Not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing.
>
> Don
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Hello Incubator IPMC,

Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.4-incubating,
RC2.  This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
You can find the artifact at
http://people.apache.org/~kwright/apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, or
in svn at 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.4-incubating-RC2.
 Thanks in advance!

Karl

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Fwd: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

I think Jukka meant to post this to general@i.a.o...
Karl


-- Forwarded message --
From: Jukka Zitting 
Date: Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2
To: Karl Wright 


Hi,

+1

BR,

Jukka Zitting

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

With Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We need one more...

Karl

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 wrote:
> +1
>
> Tommaso
>
> 2012/1/4 Karl Wright 
>
>> Hello Incubator IPMC,
>>
>> Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.4-incubating,
>> RC2.  This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
>> You can find the artifact at
>> http://people.apache.org/~kwright/apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, or
>> in svn at
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.4-incubating-RC2
>> .
>>  Thanks in advance!
>>
>> Karl
>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

With Tommaso's and Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We still need one
more binding IPMC vote for this subpackage.

Karl

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 wrote:
> +1
>
> Tommaso
>
> 2011/12/29 Karl Wright 
>
>> Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
>> http://people.apache.org/~kwright.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> > Hello incubator,
>> >
>> > We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
>> > system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
>> > the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
>> > We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>> >
>> > Karl
>> >
>> >
>> > -- Forwarded message --
>> > From: Jukka Zitting 
>> > Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
>> > 0.1-incubating
>> > To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>> >
>> > I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>> > package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.
>> >
>> > Some comments, none blocking:
>> >
>> > * The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
>> > for the release.
>> > * The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
>> > troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
>> > svn tree.
>> > * Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
>> > of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
>> > ManifoldCF dependencies.
>> >
>> > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html
>> >
>> > BR,
>> >
>> > Jukka Zitting
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

We need one more binding IPMC vote for this sub-package.  Any takers?
Karl

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 wrote:
> +1
>
> Tommaso
>
> 2011/12/29 Karl Wright 
>
>> Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
>> http://people.apache.org/~kwright.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> > Hello incubator,
>> >
>> > We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
>> > system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
>> > the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
>> > We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>> >
>> > Karl
>> >
>> >
>> > -- Forwarded message --
>> > From: Jukka Zitting 
>> > Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
>> > 0.1-incubating
>> > To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> > +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>> > I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>> > package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
>> > See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.
>> >
>> > BR,
>> > Jukka Zitting
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

One more binding vote needed for this subpackage.  Please somebody vote!

Karl

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 wrote:
> +1
>
> Tommaso
>
> 2011/12/29 Karl Wright 
>
>> Hello incubator,
>>
>> We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
>> system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
>> the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
>> We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Jukka Zitting 
>> Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
>> Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
>> apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
>> To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>>
>> I checked the
>> apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>> package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
>> Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
>> package, just statically review it.
>>
>> One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
>> is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
>> crypto code, we should remove the "Cryptographic Software Notice"
>> entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
>> in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.
>>
>> BR,
>>
>> Jukka Zitting
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Thanks, Jukka.

Waiting for the last IPMC vote has become the longest and most
uncertain part of the ManifoldCF release process.  Considering the
amount of effort and good work that the committers put into each
release, it's surely not too much to ask for someone here to have a
look at it?  (We apologize; we really hate to bother you all, but
those ARE the rules...)

Respectfully,
Karl

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jukka Zitting  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> With Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We need one more...
>
> Anyone mind helping with the release?
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Sounds intriguing.  How is this done?  I'm afraid I'm vague as to the
process by which people become IPMC members.

Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Joe Schaefer  wrote:
> The solution is simple, bring more IPMC members
> in from the ManifoldCF podling.  That is exactly
> what we did for Lucy!
>
>
>
>
>>
>> From: Marvin Humphrey 
>>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 2:33 PM
>>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2
>>
>>On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 02:11:49PM -0500, Karl Wright wrote:
>>> Waiting for the last IPMC vote has become the longest and most
>>> uncertain part of the ManifoldCF release process.  Considering the
>>> amount of effort and good work that the committers put into each
>>> release, it's surely not too much to ask for someone here to have a
>>> look at it?  (We apologize; we really hate to bother you all, but
>>> those ARE the rules...)
>>
>>(Apologies in advance that this isn't a VOTE email...)
>>
>>For what it's worth, I tried to review a release candidate for an earlier
>>ManifoldCF release, but I had to give up because I just didn't feel qualified
>>to evaluate the legal aspect given ManifoldCF's large number of dependencies
>>and my limited Java-fu.
>>
>>I find it very challenging to step in as a freelance IPMC member to cast a
>>release vote on a project I haven't been involved with.
>>
>>I definitely consider the difficulty in scraping up these votes to be a
>>significant weakness in how the Incubator operates right now, but I don't have
>>any ideas about how to improve the situation. :(
>>
>>Marvin Humphrey
>>
>>
>>-
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Thanks for at least having a look at this!

Even if you find the main release to be too big to look at, the three
ManifoldCF plugins, which have separate release packages (and vote
threads) are quite small with extremely limited dependencies.  Maybe
those would be easier to digest? ;-)

Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Marvin Humphrey  wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 02:11:49PM -0500, Karl Wright wrote:
>> Waiting for the last IPMC vote has become the longest and most
>> uncertain part of the ManifoldCF release process.  Considering the
>> amount of effort and good work that the committers put into each
>> release, it's surely not too much to ask for someone here to have a
>> look at it?  (We apologize; we really hate to bother you all, but
>> those ARE the rules...)
>
> (Apologies in advance that this isn't a VOTE email...)
>
> For what it's worth, I tried to review a release candidate for an earlier
> ManifoldCF release, but I had to give up because I just didn't feel qualified
> to evaluate the legal aspect given ManifoldCF's large number of dependencies
> and my limited Java-fu.
>
> I find it very challenging to step in as a freelance IPMC member to cast a
> release vote on a project I haven't been involved with.
>
> I definitely consider the difficulty in scraping up these votes to be a
> significant weakness in how the Incubator operates right now, but I don't have
> any ideas about how to improve the situation. :(
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

I was the RM for each release.
Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Joe Schaefer  wrote:
> Let's make this simple for me: I see
> that the project has already successfully
> released 3 times now.  Who has been the
>
> RM for each release?
>
>
>
>
>>
>> From: Joe Schaefer 
>>To: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 3:02 PM
>>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2
>>
>>Generally good mentors recognize candidates
>>from their podlings who would make good IPMC
>>members and nominate them privately, just as
>>podlings nominate members for their own PPMC.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> From: Karl Wright 
>>>To: general@incubator.apache.org; Joe Schaefer 
>>>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 2:52 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2
>>>
>>>Sounds intriguing.  How is this done?  I'm afraid I'm vague as to the
>>>process by which people become IPMC members.
>>>
>>>Karl
>>>
>>>On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Joe Schaefer  wrote:
>>>> The solution is simple, bring more IPMC members
>>>> in from the ManifoldCF podling.  That is exactly
>>>> what we did for Lucy!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Marvin Humphrey 
>>>>>To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 2:33 PM
>>>>>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2
>>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 02:11:49PM -0500, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>> Waiting for the last IPMC vote has become the longest and most
>>>>>> uncertain part of the ManifoldCF release process.  Considering the
>>>>>> amount of effort and good work that the committers put into each
>>>>>> release, it's surely not too much to ask for someone here to have a
>>>>>> look at it?  (We apologize; we really hate to bother you all, but
>>>>>> those ARE the rules...)
>>>>>
>>>>>(Apologies in advance that this isn't a VOTE email...)
>>>>>
>>>>>For what it's worth, I tried to review a release candidate for an earlier
>>>>>ManifoldCF release, but I had to give up because I just didn't feel 
>>>>>qualified
>>>>>to evaluate the legal aspect given ManifoldCF's large number of 
>>>>>dependencies
>>>>>and my limited Java-fu.
>>>>>
>>>>>I find it very challenging to step in as a freelance IPMC member to cast a
>>>>>release vote on a project I haven't been involved with.
>>>>>
>>>>>I definitely consider the difficulty in scraping up these votes to be a
>>>>>significant weakness in how the Incubator operates right now, but I don't 
>>>>>have
>>>>>any ideas about how to improve the situation. :(
>>>>>
>>>>>Marvin Humphrey
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>-
>>>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>-
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: PPMC to IPMC

[Karl Wright]

My opinion: It's one thing to try to involve yourself in the fortunes
of one or two projects in addition to your own, and be willing to
provide general opinions, and be willing to contribute content to the
incubator's policy pages.  But the incubator is so huge these days and
so diverse that just keeping track of the current issues could become
a major timesink.  And there's no obvious mechanism for drawing a
line, limiting contributions to bite-sized pieces, and keeping
involvement to a manageable level.  Although, I haven't checked out
JIRA for the incubator; maybe that's a good place to start?

Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Joe Schaefer  wrote:
>
>>
>> From: Marvin Humphrey 
>>To: Joe Schaefer 
>>Cc: "general@incubator.apache.org" 
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 5:28 PM
>>Subject: Re: PPMC to IPMC
>>
>>On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:41:32PM -0800, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>>> Taking a larger interest beyond a podling is nice but not required for IPMC
>>> membership.
>>
>>+1, not a requirement.
>>
>>> We certainly don't expect members to do anything like that, so why should we
>>> expect it of non-members?
>>
>>Let's separate Incubator policy from my advice to Karl and other potential
>>IPMC aspirants.
>>
>>Regarding Incubator policy, it may be useful to do something as liberal as
>>placing PPMC members on the IPMC as soon as we think they can be trusted with
>>a binding vote for their own podling releases.  That will also give them a
>>binding vote on other IPMC issues, but will it cause problems?  I dunno.
>
>
> Trust me.  Long experience with this issue tells me it won't cause any 
> problems.
> People generally stay out of situations they are not familiar with, and adults
> typically recuse themselves from voting on things where there's an obvious
> conflict of interest going on.
>
>
>>We've talked about shrinking the IPMC to a core of people who really know and
>>care about the Incubator, and this goes the opposite direction -- but it does
>>solve some difficult problems without compromising the ASF's legal chain of
>>authority over releases.
>
>
> The best kind of oversight is COMPETENT oversight.  People who understand
> the policy, intend to respect it, and are actually familiar with the podling's
> software are in the best position to cast binding votes over it.
>
>
>>For individuals who want to be on the IPMC, you will probably get noticed
>>faster if you contribute to the Incubator as an instititution -- and even
>>better, you will gain valuable experience regarding community, legal policies
>>and how the ASF works which will help your podling succeed over the long haul.
>>So I think it is in the interest of potential candidates to get involved, even
>>if the IPMC states that it's not a requirement.
>
>
> Again, very nice, but not at all necessary.  Random people running around 
> sticking
> their fingers in various holes in our oversight woes isn't conducive to sound 
> process.
> We aim for competent oversight over our podlings, and if there aren't enough
> mentors available to provide that, let's start sourcing the podling's 
> committers.
>
> Preferably starting with RM's who have already successfully managed to release
> once.
>
> It's not exactly rocket science.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Apparently, I'm now a member of the IPMC.

+1 from me. ;-)

Karl

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> One more binding vote needed for this subpackage.  Please somebody vote!
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Tommaso Teofili
>  wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> Tommaso
>>
>> 2011/12/29 Karl Wright 
>>
>>> Hello incubator,
>>>
>>> We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
>>> system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
>>> the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
>>> We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>> From: Jukka Zitting 
>>> Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
>>> apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
>>> To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>>>
>>> I checked the
>>> apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>> package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
>>> Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
>>> package, just statically review it.
>>>
>>> One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
>>> is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
>>> crypto code, we should remove the "Cryptographic Software Notice"
>>> entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
>>> in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.
>>>
>>> BR,
>>>
>>> Jukka Zitting
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me (binding).

Karl

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> We need one more binding IPMC vote for this sub-package.  Any takers?
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
>  wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> Tommaso
>>
>> 2011/12/29 Karl Wright 
>>
>>> Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~kwright.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>> > Hello incubator,
>>> >
>>> > We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
>>> > system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
>>> > the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
>>> > We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>>> >
>>> > Karl
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -- Forwarded message --
>>> > From: Jukka Zitting 
>>> > Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
>>> > 0.1-incubating
>>> > To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> > +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>>> > I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>> > package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
>>> > See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.
>>> >
>>> > BR,
>>> > Jukka Zitting
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me (binding).

Karl

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> With Tommaso's and Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We still need one
> more binding IPMC vote for this subpackage.
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
>  wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> Tommaso
>>
>> 2011/12/29 Karl Wright 
>>
>>> Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~kwright.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>>> > Hello incubator,
>>> >
>>> > We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
>>> > system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
>>> > the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
>>> > We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>>> >
>>> > Karl
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -- Forwarded message --
>>> > From: Jukka Zitting 
>>> > Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
>>> > 0.1-incubating
>>> > To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>>> >
>>> > I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>> > package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.
>>> >
>>> > Some comments, none blocking:
>>> >
>>> > * The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
>>> > for the release.
>>> > * The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
>>> > troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
>>> > svn tree.
>>> > * Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
>>> > of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
>>> > ManifoldCF dependencies.
>>> >
>>> > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html
>>> >
>>> > BR,
>>> >
>>> > Jukka Zitting
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me (binding).
Karl

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> With Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We need one more...
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Tommaso Teofili
>  wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> Tommaso
>>
>> 2012/1/4 Karl Wright 
>>
>>> Hello Incubator IPMC,
>>>
>>> Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.4-incubating,
>>> RC2.  This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
>>> You can find the artifact at
>>> http://people.apache.org/~kwright/apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, or
>>> in svn at
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.4-incubating-RC2
>>> .
>>>  Thanks in advance!
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Three binding +1's, >72 hours, vote passes.
Karl

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
> Apparently, I'm now a member of the IPMC.
>
> +1 from me. ;-)
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:
>> One more binding vote needed for this subpackage.  Please somebody vote!
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Tommaso Teofili
>>  wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>> Tommaso
>>>
>>> 2011/12/29 Karl Wright 
>>>
>>>> Hello incubator,
>>>>
>>>> We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
>>>> system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
>>>> the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
>>>> We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- Forwarded message --
>>>> From: Jukka Zitting 
>>>> Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
>>>> apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
>>>> To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
>>>>
>>>> I checked the
>>>> apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
>>>> package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
>>>> Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
>>>> package, just statically review it.
>>>>
>>>> One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
>>>> is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
>>>> crypto code, we should remove the "Cryptographic Software Notice"
>>>> entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
>>>> in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.
>>>>
>>>> BR,
>>>>
>>>> Jukka Zitting
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org