Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

good news On 4 January 2016 at 23:33, Yuri Z wrote: > Ok, we have Ians vote! > > On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 1:17 PM Yuri Z wrote: > > > I think Ian already figured out his issues. The first one - he had to use > > jdk1.7 - the second one - you had first to compile with ant before > > importing the

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Ok, we have Ians vote! On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 1:17 PM Yuri Z wrote: > I think Ian already figured out his issues. The first one - he had to use > jdk1.7 - the second one - you had first to compile with ant before > importing the project into Eclipse. Anyway, we have new build system in > place.

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

I think Ian already figured out his issues. The first one - he had to use jdk1.7 - the second one - you had first to compile with ant before importing the project into Eclipse. Anyway, we have new build system in place. On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 4:12 AM Andreas Kotes wrote: > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 04:49:30PM +, Upayavira wrote: > Someone needs to just agitate on general@incubator to find a volunteer > or two to review our release. > > Once it has received three +1 votes from Incubator PMC members, it will > be an official incubator release and we are done with th

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

@Ali @Upayavira can you please forward this mail thread (from general@apache) So i can reply with same subject? On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 3:21 PM Upayavira wrote: > Not quite the same. The project has put the release to the Incubator > PMC. If they do not respond, it isn't the Wave community's fau

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10 / due reports

Andreas, Currently, regarding this release, we are not aware of any legal issues with the release candidate. Because it is our first, it needs to be vetted by the Incubator PMC (project management committee). The Incubator PMC is a large and diverse group, and it can sometimes be hard to get peopl

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Someone needs to just agitate on general@incubator to find a volunteer or two to review our release. Once it has received three +1 votes from Incubator PMC members, it will be an official incubator release and we are done with that task. Upayavira On Wed, Dec 23, 2015, at 02:23 PM, Yuri Z wrote:

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10 / due reports

Hi, On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 03:25:26PM +0100, Andreas Kotes wrote: > what about the due reports? oh. those were filed. my bad. count -- Andreas 'count' Kotes Taming computers for humans since 1990. "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive, and go do it. Because what th

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10 / due reports

Hi, On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 02:23:21PM +, Yuri Z wrote: > @Ali @Upayavira > Is the release still stuck? > Are there any issues can be addressed to finalize the release? is there any way to help out? what about the due reports? count > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:01 PM Michael MacFadden <

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

@Ali @Upayavira Is the release still stuck? Are there any issues can be addressed to finalize the release? On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:01 PM Michael MacFadden < michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ok, > > I am revising the legal perspective today. > > > > > On 10/20/15, 6:40 PM, "Upayavira" wrot

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Not quite the same. The project has put the release to the Incubator PMC. If they do not respond, it isn't the Wave community's fault. So, in the board report, you can state that you are waiting on the Incubator PMC to complete your I first release vote. Upayavira On Sun, Nov 29, 2015, at 10:15 A

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Im assuming since we havnt heard anything the situation is still the same? On 17 November 2015 at 03:33, Upayavira wrote: > Bug and nudge on general@incubator. > > Upayavira > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015, at 04:40 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote: > > Is there anything we can do to help with that? > > > >

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Bug and nudge on general@incubator. Upayavira On Mon, Nov 16, 2015, at 04:40 PM, Michael MacFadden wrote: > Is there anything we can do to help with that? > > > > > On 11/14/15, 6:07 AM, "Ali Lown" a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: > > >I am trying to get enough votes from IPMC, we need 3 but only ha

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Is there anything we can do to help with that? On 11/14/15, 6:07 AM, "Ali Lown" wrote: >I am trying to get enough votes from IPMC, we need 3 but only have 2 >currently (Justin, Christian). > >Ali > >On 14 November 2015 at 00:25, Evan Hughes wrote: >> Is the release still stuck due to the iss

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

I am trying to get enough votes from IPMC, we need 3 but only have 2 currently (Justin, Christian). Ali On 14 November 2015 at 00:25, Evan Hughes wrote: > Is the release still stuck due to the issue the general member is having? > On 06/11/2015 4:13 AM, "Upayavira" wrote: > >> Ahh, got it. What

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Is the release still stuck due to the issue the general member is having? On 06/11/2015 4:13 AM, "Upayavira" wrote: > Ahh, got it. What you meant was: > 6 committer votes > 1 mentor vote > 4 non-binding > > I took it to mean 6 votes total, of which 1 mentor and 4 non-bonding. > > Clarity sh

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Ahh, got it. What you meant was: 6 committer votes 1 mentor vote 4 non-binding I took it to mean 6 votes total, of which 1 mentor and 4 non-bonding. Clarity shines forth, thank you. Are you now in a position to forward this to general@incubator? Thx On Thu, Nov 5, 2015, at 05:10 PM, Ali

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Upayavira, Am I overlooking something? I definitely wrote 6 committer votes (+1 mentor vote) in the email dated 3rd November. https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-wave-dev/201511.mbox/%3CCABRGrVenajwQPBw98Zy99UqrMNNQMJ-X5tGcWWAMR3xNX%2Bnu7w%40mail.gmail.com%3E Ali On 3 November

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Congrats Ali, and good luck with your future plans! Can I ask you to check those tallies? I'm sure there are more committer/PPMC member votes than two. Upayavira On Tue, Nov 3, 2015, at 03:22 PM, Ali Lown wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks for taking part in verifying this release candidate, it is > g

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Hi all, Thanks for taking part in verifying this release candidate, it is great to finally be able to take a potential release to the others in the incubator! (I apologize for not following up sooner, I have finally graduated from Uni, so am now sorting out what comes next...) These results super

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

I vote for release. All the best, John Blossom email: jblos...@gmail.com phone: 203.293.8511 google+: google.com/+JohnBlossom On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 2:58 AM, Ali Lown wrote: > Hi all, > > RC10 is now available for review. > Artefacts can be found here: > https://people.apache.org/~al/wave_rc

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Sure, I ll take it from here, just need to refresh my memory on the procedure. On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 at 11:25, Evan Hughes wrote: > Seems the clutches of University/College/Higher Education have stolen ali > from us, would anyone be able to move this process forward? > > On 31 October 2015 at 06:13,

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Seems the clutches of University/College/Higher Education have stolen ali from us, would anyone be able to move this process forward? On 31 October 2015 at 06:13, Yuri Z wrote: > @Ali, can you please proceed with sending the vote result and pushing the > artifacts? > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:1

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

@Ali, can you please proceed with sending the vote result and pushing the artifacts? On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:11 PM Michael MacFadden < michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > It would seem so. > > > > > On 10/27/15, 7:34 PM, "Evan Hughes" wrote: > > >I believe we have enough votes if I'm not mis

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

It would seem so. On 10/27/15, 7:34 PM, "Evan Hughes" wrote: >I believe we have enough votes if I'm not mistaken? > >On 26 October 2015 at 11:53, Rahul Tokase wrote: > >> +1 >> >> On 26 Oct 2015 00:53, "Christian Grobmeier" wrote: >> > >> > Hey folks, >> > >> > I checked but didn't find any

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

I believe we have enough votes if I'm not mistaken? On 26 October 2015 at 11:53, Rahul Tokase wrote: > +1 > > On 26 Oct 2015 00:53, "Christian Grobmeier" wrote: > > > > Hey folks, > > > > I checked but didn't find anything. +1 from me. > > > > I checked on legals of course. > > > > Cheers > > >

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

+1 On 26 Oct 2015 00:53, "Christian Grobmeier" wrote: > > Hey folks, > > I checked but didn't find anything. +1 from me. > > I checked on legals of course. > > Cheers > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015, at 01:11, Evan Hughes wrote: > > +1 > > On 24/10/2015 4:17 AM, "Ben Hegarty" wrote: > > > > > +1 > > >

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Hey folks, I checked but didn't find anything. +1 from me. I checked on legals of course. Cheers On Sat, Oct 24, 2015, at 01:11, Evan Hughes wrote: > +1 > On 24/10/2015 4:17 AM, "Ben Hegarty" wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Michael MacFadden < > > michael.macfad...@gm

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

+1 On 24/10/2015 4:17 AM, "Ben Hegarty" wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Michael MacFadden < > michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > On 10/22/15, 2:13 PM, "Alex North" wrote: > > > > >+1 > > > > > >On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 at 22:08 Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado < >

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

+1 On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Michael MacFadden < michael.macfad...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > > > > On 10/22/15, 2:13 PM, "Alex North" wrote: > > >+1 > > > >On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 at 22:08 Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado > >wrote: > > > >> El 10/10/15 a las 08:58, Ali Lown escribió: > >> > Hi all, >

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

+1 On 10/22/15, 2:13 PM, "Alex North" wrote: >+1 > >On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 at 22:08 Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado >wrote: > >> El 10/10/15 a las 08:58, Ali Lown escribió: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > RC10 is now available for review. >> > Artefacts can be found here: >> > https://people.apache.org/~al/wave_

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

+1 On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 at 22:08 Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado wrote: > El 10/10/15 a las 08:58, Ali Lown escribió: > > Hi all, > > > > RC10 is now available for review. > > Artefacts can be found here: > > https://people.apache.org/~al/wave_rc/0.4-rc10/ > > (Remember checksums are from 'gpg --print-md

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

El 10/10/15 a las 08:58, Ali Lown escribió: > Hi all, > > RC10 is now available for review. > Artefacts can be found here: > https://people.apache.org/~al/wave_rc/0.4-rc10/ > (Remember checksums are from 'gpg --print-md SHA512 $f > $f.sha') > > I have included both source and binary artefacts for

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Ok, I am revising the legal perspective today. On 10/20/15, 6:40 PM, "Upayavira" wrote: >As far as I'm concerned, you can still vote on the existing thread. >Please vote from a legal perspective rather than a technical one. > >The timeframe is set to ensure people have the ability to vote -

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

As far as I'm concerned, you can still vote on the existing thread. Please vote from a legal perspective rather than a technical one. The timeframe is set to ensure people have the ability to vote - it isn't a requirement that it completes within a specific timeframe. thx. Upayavira On Mon, Oct

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

All, I still find the Wave project quite interesting and am more than happy to help. I just haven’t really felt the pull of the community. If I thought there we something specific I could do to help I would be more than happy. I would like to see the release finally happen. Even if we event

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Non-binding votes have a different value. If we had insufficient committer/PPMC votes but loads of quality (I.e not drive by) non-binding votes, it would suggest we have a different problem, and could look how to addresss that. Upayavira On Sat, Oct 17, 2015, at 09:33 PM, Zachary Yaro wrote: > I

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

I think we should try to contact some of them again and see if we can get the vote over. If we fail again - then we should move away. On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 8:35 AM Evan Hughes wrote: > woops thought monday was the cutoff > > On 18 October 2015 at 12:33, Zachary Yaro wrote: > > > I would have

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

woops thought monday was the cutoff On 18 October 2015 at 12:33, Zachary Yaro wrote: > I would have cast a vote, but I read non-binding votes were discouraged. > To clarify, what are the criteria for being able to cast a binding vote for > this project? > > Zachary Yaro > > On 17 October 2015 at

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

I would have cast a vote, but I read non-binding votes were discouraged. To clarify, what are the criteria for being able to cast a binding vote for this project? Zachary Yaro On 17 October 2015 at 21:48, Ali Lown wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks to Yuri and Jeremy for downloading and trying out thi

[RESULT][VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Hi all, Thanks to Yuri and Jeremy for downloading and trying out this RC. Well, I set a "deadline" around the 17th October which has now well and truly passed. My vote on the matter was a +1 (though I realize that I failed to put this in my original email, so you are allowed to ignore this for f

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

+1 +Jérémy Naegel Public Information Officer On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Yuri Z wrote: > +1 > I did the following: > - Checked signatures > - Opened the binary and verified it works. > - Opened the source and verified that it can be built and works. > - Re

Re: [VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

+1 I did the following: - Checked signatures - Opened the binary and verified it works. - Opened the source and verified that it can be built and works. - Reviewed the changes for the rc 10. Ali - Thanks for making this RC! On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:59 AM Ali Lown wrote: > Hi all, > > RC10 is n

[VOTE] Wave 0.4.0-rc10

Hi all, RC10 is now available for review. Artefacts can be found here: https://people.apache.org/~al/wave_rc/0.4-rc10/ (Remember checksums are from 'gpg --print-md SHA512 $f > $f.sha') I have included both source and binary artefacts for convenience. The release version (if successful) will be 0