Re: Druid 0.12.0 release (pre incubation)

As a mentor of Druid, sounds good to me. It’s good to keep on releasing regularly - the community relies on it. Please mention this in the board report (due in about a week). When will the next release be, and will you be able to make that under the incubator process? Julian > On Mar 2, 2018

Podling setup

I’m a mentor of a new podling, Druid. I would like to help them get set up, e.g. create mailing lists, create git repos. I tried to use https://selfserve.apache.org/ for these, but it only allows officers (i.e. PMC chairs). How is this supposed to work? Is the po

Re: Podling setup

> On Mar 8, 2018, at 4:51 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: > > On 07/03/18 23:24, Julian Hyde wrote: >> I’m a mentor of a new podling, Druid. I would like to help them get set up, >> e.g. create mailing lists, create git repos. I tried to use >> https://s

Re: Podling setup

s wrote: > > On 09/03/18 07:47, Julian Hyde wrote: >> >> >>> On Mar 8, 2018, at 4:51 AM, Mark Thomas wrote: >>> >>> On 07/03/18 23:24, Julian Hyde wrote: >>>> I’m a mentor of a new podling, Druid. I would like to help them get set >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Pinot into Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Ironic that Druid — a similar project — has just entered incubation too. But of course that is not a conflict. Both are great projects. Good luck! Julian > On Mar 9, 2018, at 7:37 PM, Carl Steinbach wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > On Fri, Mar 9, 2018, 7:29 PM kishore g wrote: > >

Re: Self Serve & IPMC Members

It was I who originally raised this issue. I didn’t expect much to be done. I was very pleasantly surprised. Thank you to John Ament, Mark Thomas, Greg Stein and Chris Lambertus (and maybe others I am unaware of) for each picking up the baton and driving this issue to a solution. Julian > On

Re: [VOTE]: Apache HAWQ 2.3.0.0-incubating Release

The guidance at https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basic-facts is inconsistent with https://www.apache.org/dev/release-distribution#sigs-and-sums . The former

Re: [VOTE]: Apache HAWQ 2.3.0.0-incubating Release

Yes, https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basic-facts <https://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html#basic-facts> now makes sense. Thanks for updating it, sebb. > On Mar 14, 2018, at 6:15 PM, sebb wrote: > > On 14 March 2018 at 19:11, Julian Hyde wrote: >>

[DISCUSS] Absent mentors

The incubator has an ongoing problem with lack of mentor engagement. Mentors are a crucial component of the incubation process. Incubation is the time when projects learn the Apache Way, and they cannot learn in a vacuum. I’d like to discuss possible solutions to this problem. I’d like to hear f

Re: The role of a mentor

Has anyone here taught someone how to fish? (Or how to make cookies, or ski?) Mostly you just stand off, watching what they do. If you see them about to screw up in a big way, step in. Occasionally, offer them hints for how they might do what they’re doing a little bit better. (Not too often, be

Re: Redirecting pagespeed.incubator.apache.org to modpagespeed.com

I (as a Druid mentor) suggested the placeholder page, for the exact reasons Greg describes. Short term, I promise, and better than a 404. Julian > On Apr 13, 2018, at 20:15, Greg Stein wrote: > > One step at a time. If they want to throw a single page up *today* rather > than wait six weeks t

Re: Default webpages for new podlings

A template paragraph of simple HTML seems ideal, and it’s reasonable to expect podlings to create it by the time of their first board report. A full branding-compliant web site is a more complex undertaking, and we the IPMC should not try to hurry that process. The podling's interests are aligne

Re: Default webpages for new podlings

Luciano created a Jekyll prototype a year or so ago. Let’s dust that off. Julian > On Apr 15, 2018, at 19:30, Ted Dunning wrote: > >> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> Hi - >> >> I think that a brand compliant initial podling page would not be hard to >> create usin

Re: Default webpages for new podlings

Just to clarify, in case people are not familiar with Jekyll. It is a code generator that a developer runs in their sandbox, and it generates the site. The developer then checks in the site to git or svn. So, the developer has complete control over the HTML that is checked in. They can manually

Re: Review mailing list membership?

I’m one of your (druid codling’s) mentors and, yes, I moderate the druid lists. I tried a week or so ago to list the members of druid’s lists and struck out. In twenty minutes, I couldn’t find the solutions listed below: whimsy and dev-l...@druid.apache.org . (

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

Forwarding my vote from the PPMC vote: +1 (binding) Julian > On May 7, 2018, at 7:49 AM, Jonas Pfefferle wrote: > > Please vote to approve the source release of Apache Crail 1.0-incubating > (RC2). > > The podling dev vote thread: > https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@crail.apache.org/msg00241

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

IPMC members, This vote has been open 72 hours and has two votes so far (Luciano and I are mentors). I’d really appreciate it if someone else could download and vote. This is Crail’s first release in the incubator but in my opinion they’re in pretty good shape. Julian > On May 7, 2018, at

Re: Publishing Maven artifacts under third-party coordinates (was: Set up Nexus staging profile for Dubbo ...)

In other words, there are several ways to prove that a binary release is WRONG but (to Greg’s point) there is no way to prove it RIGHT. As a mentor, I strongly advise against podlings making binary releases, especially for the first release. It’s difficult enough to get L&N correct for source r

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

I agree about the missing DISCLAIMER file and the missing disclaimer in README.md. -1 until those are fixed. Regarding directories, I disagree. Common practice is to have everything (including NOTICE, README and DISCLAIMER) in a directory that is named after the release. If you do otherwise, yo

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

, at 11:42 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > > Julian, > > On 2018/05/10 18:40:12, Julian Hyde <mailto:jh...@apache.org>> wrote: >> I agree about the missing DISCLAIMER file and the missing disclaimer in >> README.md. -1 until those are fixed. >> >> Reg

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC2)

ent. If so, you can >> just pull out the distribution logic from the parent pom's repo ( >> https://github.com/apache/maven-apache-parent/blob/master/pom.xml#L336-L417 >> ) and merge that into the Crail pom. >> >> John >> >> On 2018/05/10 19:10:29,

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC3)

Forwarding my vote from the PPMC vote: +1 (binding) Julian > On May 22, 2018, at 12:29 AM, Jonas Pfefferle wrote: > > Forgot to add: > > Release artifacts have been signed with the following key: > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/pepperjo.asc > > Thanks, > Jonas > > On Tue, 22 May

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.0-incubating (RC3)

Willem, You didn’t cast a vote on the release. I don’t think test failures is a blocker because README.md tells people to skip tests. IPMC, We still need one more +1, please. Julian > On May 23, 2018, at 12:23 AM, Jonas Pfefferle wrote: > > Hi, > > At the moment there is no way to run th

[VOTE] Release Apache Calcite 0.9.2 (incubating)

for 72 hours, or until the necessary number of votes (3 +1) is reached. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Calcite 0.9.2 incubating [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... Julian Hyde, on behalf of Apache Calcite PPMC

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Calcite 0.9.2 (incubating)

This vote passes with 3 +1s and no 0 or -1 votes: +1 Steven Noels (mentor) +1 John D. Ament +1 Alan Gates (mentor) Thanks everyone. We’ll now roll the release out to the mirrors. Julian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr

Re: dashboarding incubator

I agree with David. For example, many projects are now mirrored to github, and github has very good analytics: https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/pulse https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/graphs/contributors And, I don't have to log an INFRA JIRA to get them. Which makes both m

Re: [DISCUSS] [PROPOSAL] SAMOA for Apache Incubator

Note that — especially if one does crossword puzzles — the name is extremely close to Samza. On Dec 2, 2014, at 9:27 PM, Daniel Dai wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose SAMOA as an Apache Incubator project. > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/SAMOAProposal > > I've posted posted the text

Re: Final draft of IPMC report for January 2015

ected? >> >> No change since 2014-07-02. >> >> Signed-off-by: >> >> [ ](brooklyn) Matt Hogstrom >> [ ](brooklyn) Alex Karasulu >> [X](brooklyn) David Nalley >> [ ](brooklyn) Marcel Offermans >> [X](brooklyn) Jean-Baptiste Onofré >

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Streams 0.1-incubating release

The "Disclaimers" section at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html says that the web site, documentation and releases should include a disclaimer. It does not say that the release announcement should include a disclaimer. Can someone please clarify? Julian On Feb 3, 2015, at 1:57 PM,

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Streams 0.1-incubating release

gt;> > >> > Also in the checklist for things to validate >> > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list It >> > calls out the disclaimer. >> > >> > As a rep from a project that just finally cracked through on our f

[VOTE] Release Apache Calcite 1.0.0 (incubating)

reached. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Calcite 1.0.0 incubating [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... Forwarding 1 vote from an IPMC member on the PPMC vote: +1 Brock Noland Julian Hyde, on behalf of Apache Calcite PPMC

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Calcite 1.0.0 (incubating)

This vote passes with 3 +1s and no 0 or -1 votes: +1 Brock Noland +1 Alan Gates (mentor) +1 Ashutosh Chauhan (champion) Thanks everyone. We’ll now roll the release out to the mirrors. Julian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-uns

[DISCUSS] Is the Incubator a product? If so, why are there so few bugs?

Guess how many bugs have been logged against the Incubator in the last 2 years? Only four[1]. The recent discussions about effective mentoring got me thinking. I know that my mentors are busy people, so I don't bother them with a question unless I've first tried to find the answer. In fact, most o

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Calcite 1.0.0 (incubating) released

lcite namespace; the release notes[1] describe how to migrate code that used the old APIs. The release can be obtained from an Apache Mirror[2]. For general information on Apache Calcite, please visit the home page[3]. Regards, Julian Hyde, on behalf of Apache Calcite PPMC [1] https://githu

[VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.1.0-incubating

necessary number of votes (3 +1) is reached. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Calcite 1.1.0-incubating [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... Julian Hyde, on behalf of Apache Calcite PPMC - To unsubscribe, e-mail

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.1.0-incubating

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Minor issue is that the RC was not placed in the correct place [1] Can this > be done with the next release candidate? Yes, I will amend our release instructions to make sure that the RC is placed in https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.1.0-incubating

This vote passes with 3 +1s and no 0 or -1 votes: +1 Alan Gates (mentor) +1 Ted Dunning (mentor) +1 Justin Mclean Thanks everyone. We’ll now roll the release out to the mirrors. I will make sure that the issue that Justin raised is fixed in the next release. Julian -

[VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating

because... Julian Hyde, on behalf of Apache Calcite PPMC - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.2.0-incubating

This vote passes with 3 +1s and no 0 or -1 votes: +1 Alan Gates (mentor) +1 Justin Mclean +1 Ashutosh Chauhan Thanks everyone. We’ll now roll the release out to the mirrors. Julian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@i

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

I am another happy user of Freemarker. Calcite, Drill and Phoenix all use it as a pre-processor, to stitch together SQL grammar files. It’s worth reading http://freemarker.org/whoWeAre.html. It gives a sense of how the Freemarker community has self-governed and evolved over its long history, and a

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

Yes, I recently needed a lightweight templating engine (a single jar with no dependencies). I considered Freemarker, but rejected it. A freemarker-lite module would have hit the spot. Templating may not be sexy anymore, but it is useful for a wide variety of tasks, and it's not going away. Julian

[VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.3.0-incubating

(binding) And forwarding the votes of two other IPMC members: +1 (binding) Alan Gates +1 (binding) Jacques Nadeau Julian Hyde, on behalf of Apache Calcite PPMC

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release apache-calcite-1.3.0-incubating

This vote passes with 4 +1s and no 0 or -1 votes: +1 Julian Hyde +1 Alan Gates (mentor) +1 Jacques Nadeau +1 Branko Čibej There was some feedback during voting. I have raised 3 issues: * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-743 Source distributions .tar.gz and .zip should contain

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Kylin-0.7.1-incubating

Forwarding my vote from the dev list: +1 (binding) Julian > On Jun 8, 2015, at 12:08 AM, Li Yang wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Verified hash and signature. > Compiled on Win7 64bit, JDK 1.7.0_51 > Unit test has known issue on Win7, but fine on Mac. > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Henry

Re: [VOTE] Accept Freemarker into Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Julian > On Jun 19, 2015, at 10:48 AM, Henry Saputra wrote: > > Still bit disappointed with initial committers but hopefully more > people that had contributed earlier to could add building healthy > community. > Good number of mentors so should help when making releases. > > +1 (

Re: July 2015 Report

I am the person who usually writes the incubator report, and I have been on vacation for the last 7 days. So, it looks as if Calcite has missed the deadline for this month. My apologies to the IPMC and to our shepherd P. Taylor Goetz. If it would be acceptable to file a report early tomorrow (S

Re: July 2015 Report

ng day. > > I think a late report (24-48 hrs., give or take) is perfectly tolerable on > occasion, as long as it doesn't become habitual. > > -Taylor > > >> On Jul 5, 2015, at 1:12 AM, Julian Hyde wrote: >> >> I am the person who usually writes the

Kylin mentor

The Kylin project has said that they would like more mentors. I have been mentoring unofficially for a while, and am happy to become an official mentor. I am already an IPMC member. Julian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-uns

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Kylin-0.7.2-incubating

+1 (binding) Checked signature and hashes. Built and ran unit tests (jdk 1.8, mac os x). Julian On Jul 20, 2015, at 1:36 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: > +1 (binding) > > What I did: > > Checked signatures and hashes > Ran unit tests > Ran RAT, inspected exclusions > Searched for files with odd perm

Re: Kylin mentor

Done. Thanks. On Jul 20, 2015, at 2:02 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: >> The Kylin project has said that they would like more mentors. I have been >> mentoring unofficially for a while, and am happy to become an official

Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator

I reviewed Ignite’s commit log and email lists. I got the impression of a split personality: The dev list[1] is very open and clearly following the Apache Way. Meanwhile, the commit log[2] is (to my eyes at least) difficult to decipher. In the commit log, messages such as "Merge remote-tracking

Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)

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 seen politics…) The process is necessary (mostly) to ensure clean IP. The infrastructure, less so. So, if we’re talking about how to

Re: Reform of Incubator

Cos, There is no "bureaucratism outbreak". People are not "express[ing] their expectations as a law-of-the-land". People are trying, in good faith, to make sure that decisions are made consistent with the Apache ethos. And before you ask, no, that ethos cannot be written down; it has to be interpr

Re: Looking for Champion

Note that there is an existing database product called Palo - an open source OLAP engine by German company Jedox[1]. There there is a high likelihood that Palo would have to change its name during incubation, if accepted. Julian [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_(OLAP_database)

Re: Apache account creation issues

I have submitted an account request. Sorry the original request got ignored by the Druid mentors, including myself. Just in case, please check your spam folder: I emailed you yesterday that I had submitted an account request, apparently before you sent this email, and it’s possible that other m

Re: Poddlings length of time in the incubator

Regarding Quickstep. I am a mentor. (One mentor resigned earlier this year, but the other mentor, Roman, is sufficiently engaged.) I am concerned that Quickstep is not going to graduate. They are functioning well as an academic project, as evidenced by papers at top conferences[1], but all of thei

Re: Dealing with Unresponsive Mentors

There was a long thread about absent mentors a few months ago[1]. The consensus on the thread seemed to be to introduce some metrics. I was and am skeptical of that approach because it requires constant attention from the IPMC. The solution I advocated in that thread is to encourage podlings to

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

There is a strong presumption here that a mentor is fulfilling their duty if and only if they sign the reports. I’m skeptical. I can think of cases where an engaged mentor does not sign reports (because someone else has done it), and vice versa where a disengaged mentor shows up once a quarter

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

I hear what you’re saying. As a metric it’s better than nothing, but let’s not assume it is telling us everything. I believe that asking all mentors to sign off is a change in policy or at least in practice. (Neither the “Mentors’ guide”[1] nor the “Guide to being a mentor”[2] talks about signi

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

Thanks for doing this, Justin. It must have taken quite a while. You've convinced me that missing sign-off is a reasonable proxy for mentor disengagement. Just curious: As you were reviewing lists looking for mentor activity, did you learn anything about patterns of mentor behavior? Are there any

Re: Email to be sent to inactive mentors

Perhaps add some recognition in the text of the email that there may be activity that we are unaware of? (Unlikely, but it seems rude to presume.) I strongly support your efforts to hold mentors accountable. Thanks for doing it, Justin! Julian On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 5:53 PM Justin Mclean wrote:

Re: Incubator release checklist

Releases are invariably created from a particular commit from the source control system (usually a git commit these days). I think it’s important to check that the contents of the source tarball match the contents of the source control system at that commit. (To do this, I unpack the tar file in

Re: Email to be sent to inactive mentors

By that argument there’s no point speaking at ApacheCon. Because it doesn’t happen on a mailing list. So let’s not be so strict. Clearly there are many ways that a mentor can assist. Some of them are not measurable (such as having a phone call). But I think any measurable activity should count

How to review so-called "binary releases"?

It has been said many times that Apache does not do binary releases, only source releases. But users like binary releases (or pre-built binary artifacts, if you prefer), and therefore podlings like to create them. So, is there any guidance for how to review a release that contains source and bi

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

t;> >>> When reviewing binary archives we need to make sure that the license file >>> is updated with the shiped dependencies licenses appropriately and that >>> they are all compatible with the Apache License (notice file might also >>> need to be updated).

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

that LICENSE policy that Justin linked to applies to > convenience binaries creates confusion about reviewing binaries. > > My 2 cents, > -Alex > > On 10/25/18, 6:39 PM, "Greg Stein" wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 12:25 PM Julian Hyde wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Crail-1.1-incubating [rc3]

Forwarding my vote from the PPMC vote: +1 (binding) I checked the source artifacts but not the binary artifacts. Therefore I agree with Justin that the source artifacts can be included in the release but not the binary artifacts. Julian On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 1:04 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi

Re: licenses and copyrights of dependencies

What Alex is saying makes sense. Whether you like it or not, you are creating a derived work (or something - I am not a lawyer), and that needs its own L&N. > On Nov 7, 2018, at 9:03 AM, Alex Harui wrote: > > IIRC, we use the food allergy analogy for these situations. AIUI, the goal > is f

Re: [VOTE] Accept burp into the Apache Incubator

Dave, You’ll want to cancel this vote. The subject line is an unfortunate victim of auto-correct. Julian > On Nov 8, 2018, at 11:06 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > Hi - > > This is a VOTE to accept the brpc Project into the Apache Incubator. > > It will last for at least 72 hours and will pass

Re: [VOTE] Accept the brpc Project into the Apache Incubator.

+1 (binding) > On Nov 8, 2018, at 11:29 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Regards, > Dave > >> On Nov 8, 2018, at 11:25 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: >> >> Hi - >> >> This is a VOTE to accept the brpc Project into the Apache Incubator. >> >> It will last for at least 72 hours and will p

Re: [VOTE] Accept the Iceberg project for incubation

+1 (binding) Julian > On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Arthur Wiedmer wrote: > > +1 > > (Non-binding) > > Best, > Arthur > > On Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 09:24 Hugo Louro >> +1 (non-binding) >> >>> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Owen O'Malley >> wrote: >>> >>> +1 (binding) >>> On Tue, Nov 13,

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

The question with which I started this discussion has not been answered. Given that a collection of artifacts is up for a vote, and those artifacts are a mixture of source and binary artifacts, what is a reviewer to do: 1. Vote -1. The release contains binaries. 2. Perform some cursory checks on

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

+1 to everything Mark Thomas said. On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 3:08 AM Mark Thomas wrote: > > On 13/11/2018 20:49, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > Personally, given the amount of binary releases that are distributed off of > > our very own infrastructure (and I'm not even counting our namespace > > on thi

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

+1 to what Bertrand wrote. Solves the problem very neatly. Thank you, Bertrand. It goes a long way towards answering my original question, because “What should voters check for when reviewing binary artifacts?” is now a matter for each PMC, not a matter for the Foundation. +1 to Roman’s suggest

Re: [VOTE] Retire Quickstep podling from Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) > On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:08 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > +1 (Binding) > >> On Nov 27, 2018, at 4:03 PM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >> >> Hi! >> >> after a discussion with the Quickstep community: >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6c4998e6feaec2651511a0d461d45924847135b60aa00e08

Re: [VOTE] Apache Crail 1.1-incubating (rc8)

+1 (binding) Downloaded, checked signatures, LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, built using JDK 8 on Linux, ran apache-rat. Checked that source tar ball matches git at 08c75b55f7f97be869049cf80a0da5347e550a3d. In binary artifacts, checked signatures, LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER. Julian > On Nov 30

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Airflow to TLP

+1 (binding) > On Dec 5, 2018, at 3:31 PM, Jakob Homan wrote: > > Hello- > > The Airflow podling community has VOTEd[0] to graduate, following a > very successful DISCUSS[1]. Accordingly I'm bringing the resolution > up for an IPMC VOTE. > > The podling result was: > Overall: 21 x +1 votes,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Druid (incubating) 0.13.0 [RC4]

Druid devs, Sorry, I forgot to forward my +1 (binding) from the PPMC vote. No matter; the vote passed. Well done! There were some important comments from Justin, Dave and Von during the vote. I recommend suggest that you log an issue (or issues) with their remarks now, and be sure to fix befor

Re: Hello World / CRUNCH Framework

Hi Julian, Regarding whether to do this as a streaming engine (with its own query language) or as a framework above a streaming engine, I’d say that’s a false choice. If there is relational algebra inside your system, you can provide a high-level query language that can be translated to a lower

apache-website-template

Who owns the https://github.com/apache/apache-website-template/ repo? I thought (perhaps mistakenly) that I was a committer, processed a pull request, and now I find that I cannot push. I see that Justin, Luciano and Stian have successfully made commits in the past. My branch is at https://github

Re: Incubator exit interview

Another idea is for Justin (or someone else active in the IPMC) to have a phone call with the incoming chair of the newly-graduated project. People are more likely to open up in an "off the record" and interactive setting. This would be in addition to the written questions. On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at

Re: Incubator exit interview

. Julian > On Jan 14, 2019, at 5:25 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Isn't that starting off on the wrong foot? off list communication, > non-transparancy, > treating the VP of the PMC as "more" than an administrative position, etc... > >> On Dec 2

Re: Incubator exit interview

nik wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:14 AM Kevin A. McGrail wrote: >> On 1/14/2019 1:01 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: >>> I don’t think the “decisions should be made on-list” principle applies to >>> all communication. (Otherwise why would we allow hallway conversations

Re: Podlings not following ASF release policy

I’m a mentor of Druid. We allowed Druid to continue making releases outside of Apache during incubation because ASF releases were not possible. There were various reasons - they could not release from main line because IP transfer had not been completed (if I recall correctly), and they also ne

Re: [DISCUSS] introduce "[DISCUSS]" threads for podling non-ASF release candidates

This change would be useful. As a release manager of a podling, the most disheartening thing is latency. The usual practice is a 72 hour PPMC release vote, followed by a 72 hour IPMC vote, one of which will cross a weekend, so a negative vote on the last day of the IPMC vote adds at least a wee

Re: [VOTE] Accept DataSketches into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) > On Mar 14, 2019, at 2:23 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > Hi all, > > We've discussed the proposal for the DataSketches project in [1] and [2]. > The > proposal itself has been put on the wiki [3]. > > Per incubator rules [4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the new > "DataSketch

Re: List of Projects that went straight to Top Level Projects

Most of the projects mentioned so far have been “internal” - code developed to help run the ASF. “External” projects also go straight-to-TLP and are more important because they have many more users and greater impact on the world. A couple of examples I am aware of have been “refactorings”, taki

Re: List of Projects that went straight to Top Level Projects

> On Apr 1, 2019, at 11:19 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > > I would disagree with your latter statement; they went to TLP based > on oversight, rather than on userbase/impact. I didn’t mean to suggest that we treated them differently because they had a large user base. By “important” I meant “wort

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentors SHOULD vote on podling releases prior to asking IPMC to vote

Per my reading http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval it’s not OK to stop when you reach 3 +1 votes. Because it’s not 3 +1s absolute, it’s 3 more +1s than -1s. So, you have to have a fixed, reasonable ti

Re: Podling use of StackOverflow

It can be frustrating when someone posts a question to both the user list and to StackOverflow. It means that the community has to answer the question in two places. But like many problems, that is an opportunity. Answering StackOverflow questions is a great way for people to contribute without

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Druid (incubating) 0.14.0 [RC3]

Forwarding my vote from the PPMC vote: +1 (binding) > On Apr 8, 2019, at 8:25 AM, Mohammad Asif Siddiqui > wrote: > > +1 (binding) > > Checks Done : > - incubating in name > - signatures and hashes are good > - LICENSE, NOTICE and DISCLAIMER exists > - Source files have ASF header > > Regar

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Druid (incubating) 0.14.1 [RC1]

+1 (binding) Downloaded; checked sigs and hashes, LICENSE, NOTICE and DISCLAIMER; compiled under JDK 8 on Linux; checked that release contains the same code as the corresponding git commit; ran RAT. Caveats: * I did not inspect the -bin.tar.gz file. * I got some test failures: org.apache.druid.st

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Druid (incubating) 0.14.2 [RC1]

+1 Downloaded, checked LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, compiled on Linux/JDK 8, ran RAT. Checked that contents of src tarball correspond to git 1053684f38. Did not look at bin tarball. LICENSE and NOTICE files have grown significantly since the previous release. I would appreciate if Justin or a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Druid (incubating) 0.14.2 [RC1]

No. In my defense, Druid has produced quite a few RCs recently and I’ve found it difficult to keep up. The other mentors have been quiet for a couple of months. Julian > On May 21, 2019, at 4:50 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > Did any mentor or other rIPMC member vote on this release o

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Druid (incubating) 0.14.2 [RC1]

s, > Dave > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On May 21, 2019, at 5:36 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: >> >> No. >> >> In my defense, Druid has produced quite a few RCs recently and I’ve found it >> difficult to keep up. The other mentors have been quiet for a

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.50-rc2

Forwarding my vote from the dev@hop thread: +1 (binding). IPMC members, please note that 0.50 will be Hop’s first release in incubation. As such, there are issues with the release that would not be allowed in an official Apache release, namely: * EPL-licensed source files (category B); * some bi

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.60-rc1

FWIW, I get the same error. Ubuntu 20.04, Java 8, "mvn clean compile". ... [INFO] Hop Assemblies Plugins Dist SUCCESS [ 17.172 s] [INFO] Hop Assemblies Static Assets ... SUCCESS [ 0.272 s] [INFO] Hop Assemblies Demo SUC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.60-rc1

encoding: UTF-8 OS name: "linux", version: "5.4.0-64-generic", arch: "amd64", family: "unix" $ java -version java version "1.8.0_271" Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_271-b09) Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.271-b09, mixed

Re: Turn on GitHub Issues on apache/incubator

How much will this increase the email traffic? > On Jun 3, 2021, at 9:39 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > Unless there is an objection I will turn on GitHub Issues on > https://github.com/apache/incubator next Monday. > > I’ll also set notifications so that PRs and issues are sent to general@i.a.o >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1

Forwarding my vote from the PPMC poll: +1 (binding) On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:54 AM Xun Liu wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) from me, I have checked the following items: > > - Incubating in name > - NOTICE is fine > - DISCLAIMER exists > - All links are valid > - No unexpected binary files > - All ASF

<    1   2   3   4   5   >