I agree with Jerome and Chris. I also would opt for plan #2:
incubation with TLP names.
--Ari
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
> I agree with the analysis from Jerome and Greg. All three of Chukwa's
> current committers are its original contributors. An important- and
> oft
> I meant, purely in terms of Hadoop putting forward the TLP motion to the
> board, with incubator's endorsement. But let's let options play out and
> find out what incubator recommends first. I wasn't suggesting that Hadoop
> would have some additional responsibilities here, in terms of mentorin
On 6/25/2010 12:40 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
>>
>> But the Incubator doesn't just say yes/no. We can refer this back to Hadoop
>> proposing this as a TLP, and even offer the list of mentors as observers, or
>> members of the initial PMC.
>
> The Hadoop PMC is wholly unqualified to manage Chukwa. I
I agree with the analysis from Jerome and Greg. All three of Chukwa's
current committers are its original contributors. An important- and
often difficult- part of Apache community is growing and managing the
developers working on the project. Some experience adding people in
the Incubator would be
Hi,
As one of the initial contributor, I still think that the incubator road is the
good one even if it's just for a short period of time.
The incubator will gives us the ability to get some committers outside of the
initial group of people and to mature the project.
When we will have reach that
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:34 AM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wrote:
> Yes, it seems that Hadoop PMC should supervise the vote for the chair, with
> a slightly frustrating cc list of all of the actual committers to chukwa.
> That way, nominations and votes for chair are archived on a private list.
>
> But
On 6/25/2010 3:55 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 21:21, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>
>> Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead
>> and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this
>> time.
>>
>> If the proposers want (Eric
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 21:21, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote:
>>
>>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa
>>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly
+1 for 1.
Regards,
Eric
On 6/24/10 12:21 PM, "William A. Rowe Jr." wrote:
> On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote:
>>
>>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa
>>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa sh
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:21 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote:
>>
>>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa
>>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go direct
Hrm.
I think my preference is for 1 or 2. Given that Chukwa already has a
fair bit of infrastructure up and running, seems like fewer renames is
better and would reduce user confusion.
--Ari
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 3:21 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wro
On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote:
>
>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa
>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a
>> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Bernd Fondermann
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 07:54, Eric Yang wrote:
>>> Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify
>>> the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC. One pr
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Bernd Fondermann
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 07:54, Eric Yang wrote:
>> Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify
>> the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC. One problem, Chukwa community
>> did not have a vote for PMC C
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:23 AM, Bernd Fondermann
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 19:29, Eric Yang wrote:
>> Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator.
+1
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsu
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 07:54, Eric Yang wrote:
> Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify
> the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC. One problem, Chukwa community
> did not have a vote for PMC Chair because we are not sure what is the right
> process for th
Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify
the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC. One problem, Chukwa community
did not have a vote for PMC Chair because we are not sure what is the right
process for this. Meanwhile, I have been writing quarterly report like
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Bernd Fondermann
wrote:
> IIUC, the only issue right now is that the committers are hesistant to
> go TLP because they've never been on a PMC before.
>
>> The current proposal doesn't use the incubator naming for the mailing
>> lists and svn location, from past dis
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 09:42, ant elder wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
> wrote:
>> On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>>
Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit l
On 6/22/2010 2:42 AM, ant elder wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
> wrote:
>> On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>>>
>>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>>
Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited)
>>
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
wrote:
> On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>
>>> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited)
>>> impression, pretty successful. What's the rati
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 23:37, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 6/21/2010 12:29 PM, Eric Yang wrote:
>> Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator.
>>
>> The proposal is posted at:
>>
>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal
>
> +1
+1
Added myself as a me
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 19:29, Eric Yang wrote:
> Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator.
>
> The proposal is posted at:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal
It's best practice to post the full proposal to the list, to have a
snapshot archived.
On 6/21/2010 12:29 PM, Eric Yang wrote:
> Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator.
>
> The proposal is posted at:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal
+1
-
To unsubscribe, e-mai
On Jun 21, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Eric Yang wrote:
Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache
incubator.
The proposal is posted at:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal
+1
-
To unsubscribe, e
On 6/21/10 11:29 AM, Eric Yang wrote:
Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator.
The proposal is posted at:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal
+1 (non-binding).
Cheers,
-- Leif
-
+1
Regards,
Alan
On Jun 21, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Eric Yang wrote:
> Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator.
>
> The proposal is posted at:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal
>
> Thanks
>
> Regards,
> Eric
>
--
Hey Owen,
+1, sounds good.
Cheers,
Chris
On 6/21/10 11:31 AM, "Owen O'Malley" wrote:
On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited)
> impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the
> Inc
On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>
> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>
>> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited)
>> impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the
>> Incubator route rather than putting up a Bo
On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited)
impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the
Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just
wanted to check, thanks gu
Hey Guys,
Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited) impression,
pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the Incubator route rather
than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just wanted to check, thanks guys!
Cheers,
Chris
On 6/21/10 10:29 AM, "Eric Yang" wr
31 matches
Mail list logo
