Re: [VOTE]Release Apache Liminal (incubating) 0.0.5rc2-INCUBATING

+1 (binding) On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 12:16 PM Lidor Ettinger wrote: > Hi All, > > We would like to vote on RC1 of version 0.0.5. The main purpose of V > 0.0.5 is to provide a clear extensibility API for developers to add > their own implementations of liminal abstractions - executor, task, >

Re: [VOTE]Release Apache Liminal (incubating) 0.0.5rc1-incubating

+1 (binding) On Thu, Jan 12, 2023 at 12:41 AM Lidor Ettinger wrote: > Hi All, > > We would like to vote on RC1 of version 0.0.5. The main purpose of V > 0.0.5 is to provide a clear extensibility API for developers to add > their own implementations of liminal abstractions - executor, task, >

Re: [VOTE]Release Apache Liminal (incubating) 0.0.4rc2-incubating

+1 (binding) On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 8:21 AM Lior Schachter wrote: > Hi All, > > We would like to vote on RC2 of version 0.0.4. The main purpose of V 0.0.4 is > to provide a clear extensibility API for developers to add their own > implementations of liminal abstractions - executor, task,

Re: [VOTE]Release Apache Liminal (incubating) 0.0.3rc4-INCUBATING

+1 (binding) On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 7:17 AM Lior Schachter wrote: > We would like to have a re-vote on RC4 of version 0.0.3 - after fixing the > packaging of the tag and uploading it to SVN. > > This version introduces out-of-the-box functionality to author and execute ML > workflows (data

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Liminal (incubating) 0.0.3rc4-INCUBATING

+1 (binding) On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 11:40 PM Lior Schachter wrote: > Hi All, > > We would like to vote on RC4 of version 0.0.3. > > This version introduces out-of-the-box functionality to author and execute ML > workflows (data-fetching-feature-engineering-training-inference) in the local >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Liminal (incubating) 0.0.2rc2-INCUBATING

+1 (binding) On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 7:04 AM Lior Schachter wrote: > Hi All, > > We would like to vote on RC2 of version 0.0.2. The main purpose of V 0.0.2 is > to fix issues found with AWS deployment. In RC2 we are addressing a licensing > issue - a LGPL transitive required dependency -

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Liminal (incubating) 0.0.2rc1-INCUBATING

+1 (binding) On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 8:18 AM Lior Schachter wrote: > Hi All, > We would like to initiate a vote on Apache Liminal (Incubating) V 0.0.2. The > main purpose of this version is to fix issues found with Liminal deployment > in AWS. > > Liminal community vote and result threads: >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Liminal (incubating) 0.0.1rc6-INCUBATING

+1 (binding) Can we get another vote or two please to close the first release? I know the Liminal community would appreciate it -- thanks so much! On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 09:59 AM Juan Pan wrote: > Hi, +1(unbinding) > > > > [x] Download links are valid. > > [x] Checksums and PGP signatures are

Re: [MENTORS] IPMC Policy change work in progress disclaimer

Great work Justin; this is a huge improvement for the podlings (and the most significant policy update in years). On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 6:09 AM Willem Jiang wrote: > +1. I cannot agree more with that. > > Willem Jiang > > Twitter: willemjiang > Weibo: 姜宁willem > > On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 2:17

Re: Podlings, the Incubator, relationships and Apache

I do -not- have a problem where this is all tracking towards and believe it is right, but I do have a problem with how it is justified and explained. People say: "Incubator is a PMC/TLP", "Incubator takes on the resultant legal obligations associated w/ any PMC doing a release", "we can NOT allow

Re: Podlings, the Incubator, relationships and Apache

On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 10:04 PM Greg Stein wrote: > I disagree. I see a number of people who think that podling releases are > TLP-level releases from the Incubator itself. I see people wanting > structure/policy/rules to ensure these TLP releases are done properly. And > that some want to "fix

Re: Podlings, the Incubator, relationships and Apache

I wouldn't say that there are 2 camps. The IPMC seems to be overwhelmingly in the "2nd camp", with its desire to be lenient with the releases and rules. What I see is: [1] David is saying (correctly) how Incubator is structured right now. He hasn't expressed ~any opinions; it is just an

Re: Podlings, the Incubator, relationships and Apache

I second every single sentence said here. Every. Single. Sentence. On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 10:04 AM David Nalley wrote: > There's been a lot of discussion in various threads about bureaucracy, > whether podlings are part of the ASF, etc. As a result of that I've > spent a good deal of time

Re: [IMPORTANT] Board proposal on podling releases

I think my position is well-known, but I'll restate it for completeness: (1) Podling releases are foundation releases; no exceptions. They are distributed in the same way, adopted by a foundation PMC in the same manner, and they being with word "Apache". We are responsible for them. (2) IPMC

Re: Podling use of StackOverflow

I am aware. I'd say it doesn't (or shouldn't) apply in this case. Nobody is taking a library out of SO and putting it into a project -- they don't have such a thing. Reading a generic answer how to do something from a 5-line code snippet, and then applying the (derivative) learning should not be

Re: Podling use of StackOverflow

It feels this thread has somewhat veered off the initial question. My position on this is non-purist, and perhaps more pragmatic. SO licensing: - Their licensing is reasonable for what they are trying to do. Just as many social networks, they don't want somebody to suck up their (users') content,

Re: Voting on releases with serious unaddressed issues

The issue at hand is simply called theft, and everyone (both inside and outside the community) is most welcome to point it out and ask for it to be fixed. We thank those individuals who point it out, whether in IPMC or otherwise, and look for ways to address it as soon as possible. Fixing this

Re: A smaller IPMC

As framed herein, #4 for sure. (But, that doesn't necessarily exclude support for various ideas that rework how IPMC operates, and where reducing the size may be a small part of something larger and intentional.) On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 9:13 PM Ross Gardler wrote: > I think this thread misses

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Nemo (Incubating) 0.1

+1, binding, carried from dev@ On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 12:52 AM David Meikle wrote: > +1 (binding). I checked; name, sig and hashes (only checked sha512), > notice, license, source headers, compiles from source (Ubuntu). > > As Justin says, you can remove the MD5 file. > > Cheers, > Dave > > >

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Pulsar (incubating) as a TLP

+1 (binding) On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:41 AM Dave Fisher wrote: > +1 - binding - Graduate Pulsar! > > Regards, > Dave > > On Sep 12, 2018, at 8:40 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > Hi - > > The Apache Pulsar project is ready to graduate as a TLP. They entered > Incubation on June 1, 2017, have had

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Apache Pulsar (incubating) as a TLP

Strong +1. I've been following from a distance: growth of the community is obvious, as well as maturing project governance evidenced by working through *all* issues that have been brought up. Mentors are continuing onto the PMC. I'm confident that Pulsar is ready to be a TLP. On Mon, Sep 10,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Zipkin for Apache Incubator

+1; this sounds great. On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 6:34 AM, 吴晟 Sheng Wu wrote: > > I think Skywalking may face the same issue, few people register the > mailing > list because lots of discussion happen in the github issues. > > Yes. Many people used to discuss on GitHub. We are OK with that. We

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Amaterasu (incubating) 0.2.0 (rc4)

+1 (carried over) On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > +1 (binding) > > Sorry did this a while back but forgot to send > > I checked: > - incubating in name > - signatures and hashes correct > - DISCLAIMER exists > - LICENSE is OK but could be improved > - NOTICE year

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Amaterasu (incubating) 0.2.0 (rc3)

+1 (binding), carried over. On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 9:37 PM, Yaniv Rodenski wrote: > Hi, > > I've removed the md5's, and will update the Amaterasu release procedure > accordingly. > > Cheers, > Yaniv > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 1:04 AM, Henk P. Penning wrote: > > > On Thu, 14 Jun 2018, Yaniv

[RESULT] [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Beam Go SDK

Considered reviewed / adopted by lazy consensus. Thanks. Davor On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 7:09 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > Apache Beam has received a code donation of the Go SDK from Google [1]. > This has already happened, and the paperwork is now catching up in > anticipation of the firs

[IP CLEARANCE] Apache Beam Go SDK

Apache Beam has received a code donation of the Go SDK from Google [1]. This has already happened, and the paperwork is now catching up in anticipation of the first release containing this donation. The IP clearance paperwork is ready for review, via a lazy consensus majority vote, per the IP

Re: [VOTE] Accept Druid into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 11:57 AM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote: > +1 (binding) > > -Taylor > > > On Feb 22, 2018, at 2:03 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > After some discussion on the Druid proposal[1], I'd like to > > start a vote on

Re: [VOTE] Accept Coral into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Also, happy to help, mentor, or be a connection with the Beam PMC, as appropriate. On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:54 AM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > +1 Binding > > > On 2/1/2018 9:07 AM, Byung-Gon Chun wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I would like to start a VOTE to propose

Re: [PROPOSAL] Onyx - proposal for Apache Incubation

Great work -- I think this technology has a lot of promise, and I'd love to see its evolution inside the Foundation. Parts of it, like the Onyx Intermediate Representation [1], overlap with the work-in-progress inside the Apache Beam project ("portability"). We'd love to work together on this --

Re: svn commit: r1809666 - /incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/amaterasu.xml

> > > > == > > --- incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/amaterasu.xml [utf-8] > > (original) > > +++ incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/amaterasu.xml

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Streams project from Incubator

+1 On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Ate Douma wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Ate > > > On 2017-07-10 17:09, sblackmon wrote: > >> In concert with the discussion started last week [1], please vote on >> the draft resolution which establishes Apache Streams as a new top-level >>

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Beam

/2057aab0702f36f366fc7809921a4f87108ba39b951b63598953bc6f@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 1:27 PM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 > > Thanks, > Thomas > > > On 2016-12-05 10:28 (-0800), Davor Bonaci <da...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi everyone

[DISCUSS] Apache Beam podling graduation readiness

ming data processing, enabling efficient execution across diverse distributed execution engines and providing extensibility points for connecting to different technologies and user communities. * PMC composition: * Tyler Akidau <taki...@apache.org> * Davor Bonaci &l

[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Beam, version 0.1.0-incubating

proceed with this release as staged, and will make sure we address all feedback before the next release. Thanks everyone! On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Davor Bonaci <da...@google.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > Here's the first vote for the first release of Apache Beam -- version > 0

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Beam, version 0.1.0-incubating

This vote is now complete. We'll summarize the results and next steps in the [RESULT] thread. Thanks everyone! On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Jakob Homan wrote: > +1 (binding) > > + sigs look good > + LICENSE, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER look good > + licenses in source and xml

[VOTE] Release Apache Beam, version 0.1.0-incubating

Hi everyone, Here's the first vote for the first release of Apache Beam -- version 0.1.0-incubating! The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes: * the official Apache source release to be deployed to dist.apache.org [1], and * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven