Sorry I believe I opinionated on it but did not vote.
-1 for me
For reasons already brought up and discussed.
HTH
Mich Talebzadeh,
Solutions Architect/Engineering Lead
Palantir Technologies Limited
London
United Kingdom
view my Linkedin profile
Thank you, Sean, Mitch, Hyukjin, and Maciej for your participation.
The vote is open until June 23rd 1AM (PST) and I'll conclude this vote
after that.
Dongjoon.
PS. Steve's email seems to arrive to this thread mistakenly. :)
On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 3:12 AM Steve Loughran
wrote:
> I'd say
I'd say everyone should *and* http UA in all the clients who make calls of
object stores should, as it helps field issues there. s3a and abfs clients
do provide the ability to add params there -please set them in your
deployments
On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 21:53, Dongjoon Hyun wrote:
> Please vote
+0
A PMC member raised a justified concern regarding the Apache Spark
trademark usage. Based on the linked discussion on @legal, that opinion
seems to be weakly supported by the ASF Legal Affairs Assistant V.P.
As such, it shouldn't just be rejected, especially not because of our
preference
With the spirit of open source, -1. At least there have been other cases
mentioned in the discussion thread, and solely doing it for one specific
vendor would not solve the problem, and I wouldn't also expect to cast a
vote for each case publicly.
I would prefer to start this in the narrower
Here are my replies, Sean.
> Since we're here, fine: I vote -1, simply because this states no reason
for the action at all.
Thank you for your explicit vote because
this vote was explicitly triggered by this controversial comment,
"I do not see some police action from the PMC must follow".
> I
Since the genie is out of the bottle now and I have been involved in this
discussion all the way, I think the question ought to be "Apache Spark DEV
community asks Databricks to differentiate its Spark version string". That
makes more sense as Spark DEV community is a superset of PMC if I am not
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 3:58 PM Dongjoon Hyun
wrote:
> I started the thread about already publicly visible version issues
> according to the ASF PMC communication guideline. It's no confidential,
> personal, or security-related stuff. Are you insisting this is confidential?
>
Discussion about a
For the following,
> this discussion should have been on private@ to begin with, but, the ship
has sailed. ...
> This doesn't make sense here.
I started the thread about already publicly visible version issues
according to the ASF PMC communication guideline. It's no confidential,
personal, or
As we noted in the last thread, this discussion should have been on private@
to begin with, but, the ship has sailed.
You are suggesting that non-PMC members vote on whether the PMC has to do
something? No, that's not how anything works here.
It's certainly the PMC that decides what to put in the
No, this is a vote on dev@ intentionally as a part of our previous thread,
"ASF policy violation and Scala version issues" (
https://lists.apache.org/thread/k7gr65wt0fwtldc7hp7bd0vkg1k93rrb)
> did you mean this for the PMC list?
I clearly started the thread with the following.
> - Apache Spark
What does a vote on dev@ mean? did you mean this for the PMC list?
Dongjoon - this offers no rationale about "why". The more relevant thread
begins here:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/k7gr65wt0fwtldc7hp7bd0vkg1k93rrb but it
likewise never got to connecting a specific observation to policy.
+1
Dongjoon
On 2023/06/16 19:53:03 Dongjoon Hyun wrote:
> Please vote on the following statement. The vote is open until June 23th
> 1AM (PST) and passes if a majority +1 PMC votes are cast, with a minimum of
> 3 +1 votes.
>
> Apache Spark PMC asks Databricks to differentiate its Spark
>
Please vote on the following statement. The vote is open until June 23th
1AM (PST) and passes if a majority +1 PMC votes are cast, with a minimum of
3 +1 votes.
Apache Spark PMC asks Databricks to differentiate its Spark
version string to avoid confusions because Apache Spark PMC
is responsible
14 matches
Mail list logo
