. Just a new release without JMSAppender.
> On Jan 8, 2022, at 6:34 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
>
>>> On Jan 8, 2022, at 19:39, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>>>
>>> Are you using the JMS appender? Are you using the socket receiver? If the
>> answer is no t
hair
psychiatrist, I just want a logging library without known security bugs
that remains compatible with existing code and configuration formats and
does not force me to transitively upgrade/rebuild/modify the world.
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:00 PM Ralph Goers
wrote:
>
>
> > On
ecurity
fix cannot be accomplished without a breaking change. We can cross that
bridge when and if we come to it. It may never happen. Or, it might, and
then 1 has truly reached the end of the road.
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 4:17 PM Matt Sicker wrote:
> Answers below:
>
> > On Jan 8,
vestigation and a migration may likely require huge effort in
> testing.
> >>>
> >>> Assuming this quick upgrade path doesn't exist, and I already read
> struggles by other projects trying to migrate to 2.x - maintaining 1.x and
> doing a 1.2.x release makes
> as for the v1 :: COBOL analogy, that’s not a bad comparison. Basically,
users who haven’t bothered to upgrade in 10 years will have to end up
paying astronomical costs for consultants who can still work on ancient
software effectively to help modify their systems.
I have to take some exception t
community and stable management.
> On Nov 21, 2019, at 5:16 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Nov 21, 2019, at 2:10 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>>
>> Those aren’t comparable though, right?
>>
>> Solr was a sub pro
Those aren’t comparable though, right?
Solr was a sub project that graduated to a TLP.
Omid and Tephra are projects that instead of becoming TLP’s “graduated” into
the existing Phoenix TLP.
Not the same thing.
And also I don’t believe this result is unsuccessful. Neither Omid or Tephra
cod
+1 this would be a good outcome. Both Tephra and OMID are good
technologies, with respective pros and cons, and Phoenix can make good use
of both of them, should they choose to accept ownership of the code.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:26 AM Alan Gates wrote:
> Justin and mentors of Omid and Tephr
+1
> On Sep 16, 2018, at 2:31 AM, Manu Zhang wrote:
>
> Hi mentors,
>
> The Gearpump podling has voted to retire from incubation. Here are the
> relevant discussion and vote threads from the dev list. The vote passed
> unanimously with 6 +1s.
>
> DISCUSS:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.htm
+1 binding
> On Aug 26, 2018, at 8:26 PM, Adrian Cole wrote:
>
> +1 Accept Zipkin (non binding)
>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 10:14 AM Mick Semb Wever wrote:
>>
>> After a brief discussion¹ I would like to call a VOTE to accept Zipkin into
>> the Apache Incubator.
>> The full proposal is availab
+1
After the retirement of the HTrace podling to the attic we are facing a
fragmentation or removal of distributed tracing capabilities from a set of
related projects (Hadoop, HBase, and Phoenix) that could really use it.
When considering a replacement I think if the replacement was also a
project
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 11:03 AM, Julian Hyde wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After some discussion on the Druid proposal[1], I'd like to
> start a vote on accepting Druid into the Apache Incubator,
> per the ASF policy[2] and voting rules[3].
>
> A vote for accepting a new Apache Incubator p
Forwarding my +1 (binding) from the PPMC vote
I think the issues with the website are not fatal to the vote and I am
confident will be addressed before it closes. I think it is also fine to
wait for them to be addressed before proceeding.
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Donald Szeto wrote:
> Hi
Thank you Shane!
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Donald Szeto wrote:
> Awesome. Thanks for your clarification Shane!
>
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:44 PM Shane Curcuru wrote:
>
> > Andrew Purtell wrote on 10/3/17 5:59 PM:
> > > I think we can proceed to a vote as so
e to a recommendation vote?
>
> Regards,
> Donald
>
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
> bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote:
>
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Andrew Purtell
> > wrote:
> > > ...I think
I am mentor and champion.
I've made some comment on the incubator reports to the board about readiness,
in the past few reports. PredictionIO has gotten the hang of making releases,
is reliably following ASF policies and practice (I lurk on all the lists), has
grown their PPMC, and on their own
+1 (binding)
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Chan Lee wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The PredictionIO community has voted that 0.12.0-incubating-rc3 to be good
> for a source and binary release. This thread is to facilitate a voting for
> the
> IPMC before a final official source and binary release.
>
>
+1
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 10:47 PM, Karol Brejna
wrote:
> IPMC Community,
>
> The PPMC vote to release Apache Gearpump (incubating) 0.8.4-RC1 has passed.
> We would like to now submit this release candidate to the IPMC.
>
> The PPMC vote thread is here:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d0
+1 (binding)
> On May 31, 2017, at 6:03 AM, Sean Busbey wrote:
>
> Hi folks!
>
> I'm calling a vote to accept "Livy" into the Apache Incubator.
>
> The full proposal is available below, and is also available in the wiki:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/LivyProposal
>
> For additional c
ing vote, which
> seems better in any case. These issues will be fixed asap in master and the
> live site.
>
>
> On Apr 22, 2017, at 6:28 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>
> I was just trying to get something moving. Glad to see it.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>>
ith the licensing.
>>
>> Here's my +1, not waiting for anything to be fixed.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:43 PM Andrew Purtell
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I will too, and then you will have two binding votes in the affirmative.
>
I will too, and then you will have two binding votes in the affirmative.
> On Apr 22, 2017, at 12:34 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Pat Ferrel wrote:
>>
>> But is it worth doing yet another podling RC and release vote?
>>
>
>> If it is, please vote -1, at
+1
Unpacked source tarball, layout looks ok.
Checked sums and signature: ok
LICENSE and NOTICE: ok
DISCLAIMER: ok
RAT check passes: ok
Built from source: ok (7u80)
Unit tests pass: ok (7u80)
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Gokul Gunasekaran wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This is a call for a vote on re
+1 (binding)
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Jitendra Pandey
wrote:
> Dear All,
>I would like to call a vote for accepting "Ratis" for incubation in the
> Apache Incubator.
> The full proposal is available below, and is also available at this wiki
> link.
>https://wiki.apache.org/incuba
+1 (binding)
> On Dec 1, 2016, at 8:35 AM, Felix Cheung wrote:
>
> +1
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 10:40 PM Henry Saputra
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> As the champion for Griffin, I would like to start VOTE to bring the
>> project as Apache incubator podling.
>>
>> Here is the direct quote f
+1 binding
- Checked sums and signatures: ok
- Spot checked LICENSE and NOTICE: present, properly formatted
- No binaries in the source release (except source image files)
- Compiled from source following the build instructions (8u102)
- Manually invoked Apache RAT using ./tests/.rat-excludes:
I did also mention that 72 hours is a minimum. :-)
> On Aug 1, 2016, at 6:52 AM, Kam Kasravi wrote:
>
> Thanks John, we usually do. Andy suggested under certain circumstances (in
> this case minor LICENSE corrections culled from general@ comments for RC4)
> there have been past examples where
Jersey is dual licensed CDDL and a transitive dependency from (at least) Hadoop
and Spark.
> On Jul 27, 2016, at 7:23 AM, Kam Kasravi wrote:
>
> Hi Justin
>
> These were tagged as GPL
>
>
> I'll determine their dependencies linkage - we have no references to
> com.sun.jersey within our co
I am out until the first week of August. Could one of the Gearpump mentors also
on the IPMC have a look?
> On Jul 25, 2016, at 1:14 AM, Manu Zhang wrote:
>
> Could any PMC members please take a look at this release candidate ?
> We have already passed the vote deadline but not got a vote yet.
Thank you very much John. We will fix.
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 4:50 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> Sorry but -1 due to missing DISCLAIMER in the release. See [1] for more
> details
>
>
> [1]:
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#notes-disclaimer
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3
Carrying over my +1 from the PPMC vote.
Please someone have a look at the release artifacts. I try, but don't have
the encyclopedic knowledge of policy nor the eye for detail that some of
you other IPMCers do.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Kam Kasravi wrote:
> Hi IPMC Community
>
> The PPM
tions but have largely been inactive.
> More Esgyn committers have been added since.
>
> One non-Esgyn committer, Pierre Smits, has been added since entering
> incubation.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Purtell [mailto:apurt...@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, Ju
Am I correct in understanding that when entering incubation all Trafodion
committers were Esgyn employees and after one year the podling has added
three new committers of different affiliation?
On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Stack wrote:
> We'd like to solicit feedback on whether the Trafodiio
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Henry Saputra
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Following the DISCUSS thread about Apache Twill graduating as TLP, I would
> like to send VOTE request thread.
>
> All the +1 binding votes sent in the DISCUSS will be counted in the final
> tally unless the individu
I'd vote +1. Twill has been doing just fine for a while.
> On Jun 1, 2016, at 10:24 AM, Henry Saputra wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> The Apache Twill PPMCs and the community had discussed and voted to
> graduate to become Apache TLP.
>
> It is a small but welcoming community, and the mentors and res
The
VOTE
to
a
ccept PredictionIO into the Apache Incubator
has concluded and passed with 20 binding +1s, 8 non-binding +1s, and no 0
or -1 votes.
Thanks to all who voted.
Binding +1s
Andrew Purtell
Luciano Resende
James Taylor
Suneel Marthi
Chris Nauroth
+1 (binding)
On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Since it seems the discussion has died down, I am now calling a vote on
> accepting Pony Mail into the Incubator. Sorry in advance for potato.
>
> This vote will run for the usual 72 hours.
>
> ### PROPOSAL BEL
nsors
Champion
Andrew Purtell
Nominated Mentors
Andrew Purtell
James Taylor
Lars Hofhansl
Suneel Marthi
Xiangrui Meng
Luciano Resende
Sponsoring Entity
Apache Incubator PMC
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
This test failure looks like it could be a failure to set up the minicluster.
If so, that can be a networking problem on Macs unless using a very recent
version of the JDK, or any number of reasons really (minicluster is as complex
as it sounds). Anyway, perhaps posting the complete test output
uneel Marthi wrote:
>
> The current list is good to go and includes all (both present and former)
> PIO folks.
> I am fine with going for Voting with the present list.
>
> +1
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
> > The current li
The current list of initial committers was that provided me by the
PredictionIO folks so I have every reason to believe they all have a stake
at entering incubation.
It's totally fine with me if we stick to that list. I am just trying to
facilitate the fairest process possible.
On Friday, May 20
member on that project).
>
> Mike and I, together with Luciano (who is a mentor on this proposal) would
> like to volunteer our services as initial committers, if that is agreeable.
>
> Kind regards
> Nick
> mln...@apache.org
>
>
>
> >
> >
esforce plans to transfer the rights to the name
> "PredictionIO" to the ASF? Or is the podling expected to take a new name?
>
> John
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 4:42 PM Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > It is my pleasure to
> >
gy:
> > >> 1. do you think it would be possible to leverage Apache Beam
> > >> (incubating)
> > >> for abstracting away dependency on execution frameworks? My
> > >> understanding
> > >> is that PredictionIO curren
possible?
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
>> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> It is my pleasure to
>>
>> propose the PredictionIO project for incubation at the Apache Software
>> Foundation.
>>
://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PredictionIO
Best regards,
Andrew Purtell
= PredictionIO Proposal =
=== Abstract ===
PredictionIO is an open source Machine Learning Server built on top of
state-of-the-art open source stack, that enables developers to manage and
deploy production-ready predictive services
+1 (binding)
> On Apr 25, 2016, at 11:14 AM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote:
>
> Following the discussion thread [1], I would like to call a VOTE to accept
> Gossip into the Apache Incubator.
>
> The Gossip proposal can be found here [2] and is also listed below.
>
> [ ] +1 Accept Gossip into the Apac
to Java 5, fixing formatting where it didn't fit the
> > modern
> > > > Java conventions).
> > >
> > > Those sound like good ideas! There really are a lot of ways to make a
> > > project
> > > easier to contribute to, but they can be hard to see
+1 (binding)
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Daniel Dai wrote:
> Following the discussion earlier, I'm calling a vote to accept Omid as
> a new Incubator project.
>
> [ ] +1 Accept Omid into the Incubator
> [ ] +0 Indifferent to the acceptance of Omid
> [ ] -1 Do not accept Omid because ...
>
>
Apache Phoenix just released version 4.7.0 with big news: transactions support,
using Tephra. There's some interest in a successful Tephra incubation beyond
the podling already. That said, that new code in Phoenix can be made pluggable
to support more than one transaction oracle. Omid might be a
Greetings,
Thanks to all who voted! The vote has passed with the following tally:
+1 Binding (11 total)
Andrew Purtell
James Taylor
Reynold Xin
Jarek Jarcec Checo
Alan Cabrera
Jakob Homan
P. Taylor Goetz
Todd Lipcon
Ted Dunning
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Flavio Junqueira
+1 Non-binding (8 total
.
>
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > The discussion of the Gearpump proposal has concluded. Please vote to
> > accept Gearpump into the Apache Incubator. I will leave this vote open
> for
> > at least the
t; == Community ==
>
> Core developers of Tephra are at Cask Data. Recently the developer community
> has expanded to include folks from Apache Phoenix. We hope to extend our
> contributor base significantly and we will invite all who are interested
> in working on distributed transaction
t; On Mar 1, 2016, at 7:41 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> >
> > It looks like discussion has wrapped up here so I will proceed shortly
> with
> > a VOTE thread.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Sean Zhong wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Feb 27
* Xuefu Zhang – Cloudera
* Rui Li – Intel
=== Sponsors ===
Champion
Andrew Purtell
Nominated Mentors
* Andrew Purtell
* Jarek Jarcec Cecho
* Todd Lipcon
* Xuefu Zhang
* Reynold Xin
Sponsoring Entity
Apache Incubator PMC
It looks like discussion has wrapped up here so I will proceed shortly with
a VOTE thread.
On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Sean Zhong wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 12:56 AM, Sean Zhong wrote:
>
> > sting this.
> >
> >
> If you want a direct look and feel of what it does, please see demo
>
for the project to use
>
> Mailing lists
> priv...@mnemonic.incubator.apache.org (moderated subscriptions)
> comm...@mnemonic.incubator.apache.org
> d...@mnemonic.incubator.apache.org
>
> Git repository
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mnemonic
>
>
* Xuefu Zhang – Cloudera
* Rui Li – Intel
=== Sponsors ===
Champion
Andrew Purtell
Nominated Mentors
* Andrew Purtell
* Jarek Jarcec Cecho
* Todd Lipcon
* Xuefu Zhang
* Reynold Xin
Sponsoring Entity
Apache Incubator PMC
We have had several people write in to general@ over the past few months with
this type of request. In at least one case a request triggered a vote on the
private list. We should update the incubator site with guidance on what is the
best way to approach the IPMC if this isn't ideal.
> On Dec
eviews. So yeah: in his case, it *is*
> about control.
>
> Over the 17 years I've been around Apache, every single time I've seen
> somebody attempt to justify something like RTC, it always goes back to
> control. Always.
>
> -g
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015
I have to completely disagree and find your assertion vaguely offensive.
> On Nov 25, 2015, at 12:32 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> and inherited the RTC ethic from our parent community. I did
Most of the Hadoop ecosystem uses RTC. I can't speak to other projects but
on the one I chair there's no conspiracy to exclude anyone.
I chair Bigtop. We recently tested a switch to CTR. It went very well and
so we just wrapped up a vote to make it the permanent state of affairs. I
think this is t
+1 (binding)
Good luck!
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Discussion on the [DISCUSS] thread seems to have wound down, so I'd like to
> call a VOTE on acceptance of Kudu into the ASF Incubator. The proposal is
> pasted below and also available on the wiki at:
>
o for S2Graph,
> and mirroring to be set up to Github through INFRA.
>
> === Issue Tracking ===
>
> S2Graph currently uses the github issue tracking system associated
> with its github repo (https://github.com/kakao/s2graph/issues). We
> will migrate to the Apache JIRA
> (http
> After writing the above, I started to feel it was familiar and remember a
> very similar discussion on hbase-dev last year:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201508.mbox/%3CCA+RK=_dz+_rzumfwvya0tkvxtk4saeie6pwpgs2mxvsbq8h...@mail.gmail.com%3E
- I'd recommend people go check tha
> Because of Apache Infrastructure's centralized server model (email lists,
version control, distributions, homepages, etc.), it has the ability to
gather metrics such as, for example, the distribution of pushes to the
repository, the branch factor of the mailing list, the centrality of the
projec
If you are looking for mentors let me volunteer as one.
I think S2Graph has the potential to be a good addition to the Apache
family given its relationships and dependencies with other Apache projects
from the outset.
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Hyunsik Choi wrote:
> This project is look
ank you everyone for taking the time to review and cast your vote.
>
> We will now prepare a resolution for the next Board meeting.
>
> 10 binding:
> * Henry Saputra
> * Andrew Purtell
> * Bertrand Delacretaz
> * Julian Hyde
> * P. Taylor Goetz
> * Ted Dunning
> *
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Luke Han wrote:
> The Apache Kylin community and project made significant advances during the
> incubating (from Nov 2014) and
> believes it is ready to graduate as a top-level project.
>
> The Apache Kylin is very active. The PPMC doubled in size (a
I would not have been able to mentor Phoenix should it have come along now.
At the time I was not employed by the originator of the project. Later I
chose to join them in part because they contributed the results of their
labor to Apache. My evaluation of how well a podling might be
functioning wou
Agreed, it would be good to have this clarification. The vote is likely to
proceed more smoothly.
I'm in favor of graduation. I've been lurking over the past few months and
the podling has been functioning well.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> Maybe the podling should the
Big +1
If you don't mind a personal anecdote, in fact at work I was recently
pointedly asked how the pay is over at the Foundation. (Smile)
On Saturday, October 10, 2015, Patrick Hunt wrote:
> 10x to what Chris said, put much better than I could.
>
> We all wear multiple hats, can't tell you t
We should address perceived, and certainly provable, instances of
corruption at the Foundation directly, rather than prescribe policy that
seeks to prevent future instances as if there is a precedent (but there
isn't one here... at least one not spoken aloud, right?).
> A mentor must not be financ
+1 (binding)
Good luck!
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Julian Hyde wrote:
> This is a vote for Calcite to become a top-level project.
>
> Since joining the Incubator in May, 2014, the Calcite
> community has:
> * Produced eight IPMC-approved releases under two release
> managers;
> * Added
+1
Yay, more SQL on Hadoop, party on.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Following the discussion earlier:
>http://s.apache.org/Gaf
>
> I would like to call a VOTE for accepting HAWQ
> as a new incubator project.
>
> The proposal is available at:
> https://wiki.a
Who are the village spinsters?
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 03.08.2015 21:51, Julian Hyde wrote:
> > In my experience incubating Calcite, the “overhead” was mostly the
> infrastructure and process, not politics. (If you think the incubator is
> political, you haven’t
Can you provide a pointer to a specific example of what you mean?
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
> > >
> >
> > In fact, in my opinion it leads to the very unf
>
In fact, in my opinion it leads to the very unfortunate side effect of IPMC
>
feeling in need to justify why it exists by micromanaging podlings.
I've been through incubation as a mentor on Phoenix, Nifi, and now getting
up to speed on Trafodion, I have not seen micromanagement of podlings.
gt; Please let me know if I'm not clear enough.
>
> Thanks,
> Gavin Li
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
> > It was a simple question, and not meant to suggest anything one way or
> > other regarding my opinion of this proposal.
It was a simple question, and not meant to suggest anything one way or
other regarding my opinion of this proposal.
On Monday, June 22, 2015, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:26 PM Andrew Purtell > wrote:
>
> > > Pistachio can easily embed computation to th
> Pistachio can easily embed computation to the storage layer to achieve the
> best data locality to improve the computation performance significantly
> which is an innovative model comparing with the normal ways where the
> storage and compute are independent to each other.
Have you heard of some
+1 (binding, podling mentor)
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Joe Witt wrote:
> Hello Apache Incubator
>
> This thread is to call a vote within the Incubator for the graduation
> of Apache NiFi.
>
> Status page: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/nifi.html
> Incubator graduation discussion:
providing realtime command and control
> > > > > >> and detailed chain of custody for data; and be it further
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ...
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > >
As Sean says he's been engaged with the project while acting as mentor,
IMHO beyond mentor-ly duties. If the NiFi folks will have him on the
initial PMC and he's willing to join it, this should resolve the stated
concerns.
On Friday, June 12, 2015, Sean Busbey wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9
Java Cryptography
> Extension (JCE) for Java code.
>
> Required Resources
>
> Mailing Lists
>
> priv...@trafodion.incubator.apache.org
> d...@trafodion.incubator.apache.org comm...@trafodion.incubator.apache.org
>
> Git Repository
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache
+1
Checked signature and sums of nifi-parent (1.0.0), nifi-nar-maven-plugin
(1.0.1) and nifi (0.1.0) source release zipfiles.
Unpacked all source release zipfiles, layout looks good
README, LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER files are present in each source
zip and look ok
Source builds of nifi-paren
If you are looking for mentors, I helped on the Phoenix incubation, happy
to do so again for Trafodion.
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Stack wrote:
> I would like to start up a discussion on Trafodion joining the ASF as an
> incubating project.
>
> Trafodion is a webscale SQL-on-Hadoop solution
It certainly wouldn't hurt to have another channel for getting the word
out. I presume @ASFIncubator would announce new proposals, new projects,
project graduations, and releases of incubating software? Anything else
besides that ? (Which is quite a lot already.) This would be more Incubator
covera
+1 (binding)
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 11:55 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Following the discussion earlier in the thread:
>http://s.apache.org/KWE
>
> I would like to call a VOTE for accepting Groovy
> as a new incubator project.
>
> The proposal is available at:
> https://wiki.apache.org
+1 (binding)
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Joe Witt wrote:
> Hello
>
> The Apache NiFi (incubating) team is pleased to be calling this vote for
> the source release of Apache
> NiFi 0.0.1-incubating.
>
> With six binding (in the ppmc sense) +1 votes and no dissenting votes the
> PPMC has appr
15 21:07, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> > I'm not arguing with you Greg (smile), honestly, Subversion sounds like a
> > very laid back place to participate. It's different in Bigtop, HBase,
> > Phoenix, Whirr (of historical note), and Hadoop (secondhand observation),
> >
out
> +1 and similar as shorthand for our preference, but we never tally, as it
> isn't a formal vote.
>
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:58 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
> > In all of the projects I have been PMC or PPMC on, we vote on releases,
> new
> > committers,
Yes, and I briefly confused the two, and fessed up.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> Go to the FIRST POST of this thread (titled: "my pTLP view"!!). THAT is
> what we're talking about. Not the Strawman.
>
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Andrew
In all of the projects I have been PMC or PPMC on, we vote on releases, new
committers, and elevating committers to PMC.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
>
> > > This is *exactly* the way th
n-binding stakeholdership
in decisionmaking on new commiters, releases, and so on.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Andrew Purtell
wrote:
> > This is *exactly* the way things work in a TLP.
>
> Yes, everyone new to the Foundation on the PPMC has a sense of equal
> ownership i
es to be meaningful.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 25.01.2015 19:51, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> >> That hardly ever happens (it's most likely when there are problems with
> > >
> > a podling's first few releases), which is why you get
me perhaps quaint notion.) Of course in
IPMC voting it is different, but the IPMC is where supervision happens, or
doesn't, as some argue.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 25.01.2015 19:16, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> > With a PPMC we invite newcomers to make
nd has no recourse but to go along
> with the outcome of Apache politics or abandon the project.
>
> How is this not true? What can the incoming community make a binding vote
> on, under this proposal?
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>
> >
the project.
How is this not true? What can the incoming community make a binding vote
on, under this proposal?
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Andrew Purtell
> wrote:
> > Those of us in such a new incoming communit
I find the direction this discussion has gone personally disappointing, but
I might be missing understanding of some crucial point.
> 2. the initial PMC is comprised of only ASF Members. committers can be
>
chosen however the community decides. but the *project* is reviewed by
> people with (h
1 - 100 of 161 matches
Mail list logo
