It would be great if we could move to the [vote] thread, now that the
"broader contributing members" were also removed.
---
Best Regards,
Mohammad Sadoghi, PhD
Associate Professor
Exploratory Systems Lab (ExpoLab)
Department of Computer Science
University of California, Davis
ExpoLab:
Hello,
I removed the "broader contributing members" as suggested:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/ResilientDBProposal
Let's move ahead with the [vote] thread.
Kind regards,
Christian
On Sat, Oct 14, 2023, at 12:37, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2023, at
On Fri, Oct 13, 2023, at 20:22, Atri Sharma wrote:
> Unfortunately , I am locked out of my Apache account. While I reset that, I
> would request one of the mentors to make the changes.
>
> Post that, I will start the vote thread
If not another mentor is faster than me, I am going to look at it
Unfortunately , I am locked out of my Apache account. While I reset that, I
would request one of the mentors to make the changes.
Post that, I will start the vote thread
On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 at 10:47 PM, Mohammad Sadoghi
wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Could we move the [VOTE] phase after removing the
Dear all,
Could we move the [VOTE] phase after removing the broad contributors (as it
was suggested)?
The last [Discuss] thread was sent 10 days ago with +8(binding).
---
Best Regards,
Mohammad Sadoghi, PhD
Associate Professor
Exploratory Systems Lab (ExpoLab)
Department of Computer Science
Sure, please remove them [I do not have write access to the wiki]. Thank
you kindly.
---
Best Regards,
Mohammad Sadoghi, PhD
Associate Professor
Exploratory Systems Lab (ExpoLab)
Department of Computer Science
University of California, Davis
ExpoLab: https://expolab.org/
ResilientDB:
I suggest removing them since it is leading to confusion.
On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 12:27 PM Mohammad Sadoghi
wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> As for the question of the “Broader Contributing Members”, they do not
> qualify as initial committers as they have provided feedback / contributed
> on the
Dear all,
As for the question of the “Broader Contributing Members”, they do not
qualify as initial committers as they have provided feedback / contributed
on the broader scope of ResilientDB, so we suggest either removing them or
keeping them in a separate category. I prefer keeping them as a
Unlike the Linux kernel, we use the dev or main branch from the
official upstream repo to accept the PRs from the developer; we do the
release work on the other branch in the same repo. We don't use
another forked repo to keep those changes first. It will confuse the
contributor in finding the
I still have a question for the “Broader Contributing Members”: do we
treat them as initial committers?
It makes sense that we keep track of all the contributors on the
project website so that no one will be surprised by the long list of
initial committers.
An extensive initial committer list
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023, at 20:49, Atri Sharma wrote:
> If no further concerns, I wish to start the vote thread tomorrow.
>
Awesome. Since you have allowed plenty of "complain time," it's safe to go by
tomorrow.
Thanks for taking care of this!
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 at 12:16 AM, Christian
If no further concerns, I wish to start the vote thread tomorrow.
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 at 12:16 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
> I agree too.
>
> However, I am also concerned the titel is [DISCUSS] - shouldn't this be a
> vote already?
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023, at 13:42, 俊平堵 wrote:
> > Agree
I agree too.
However, I am also concerned the titel is [DISCUSS] - shouldn't this be a vote
already?
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023, at 13:42, 俊平堵 wrote:
> Agree with Roman and Dave that we can keep the original list.
> I think Willem is just curious on the mismatch between commits and
> committers,
Agree with Roman and Dave that we can keep the original list.
I think Willem is just curious on the mismatch between commits and
committers, and the explanation here make sense to me.
Thanks,
JP
Mohammad Sadoghi 于2023年10月10日周二 11:50写道：
> Dear all,
>
> *Question on Initial Committers:*
> As
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 6:50 AM Mohammad Sadoghi wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> *Question on Initial Committers:*
> As was mentioned earlier. The criteria that I used was to credit anyone who
> has worked on the ResilientDB project since 2018, acknowledging their
> contributions. Below is the detailed
Dear all,
*Question on Initial Committers:*
As was mentioned earlier. The criteria that I used was to credit anyone who
has worked on the ResilientDB project since 2018, acknowledging their
contributions. Below is the detailed breakdown of our contributors. So we
can reduce the list as needed in
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 9, 2023, at 7:51 PM, Suyash Gupta
> wrote:
>
> Hello All
>
> Let me try to add to Mohammad's response. We defined an initial committer
> list of 40+ members as we wanted to give credit to everyone who has
> collaborated with us on projects/papers that were
Hello All
Let me try to add to Mohammad's response. We defined an initial committer
list of 40+ members as we wanted to give credit to everyone who has
collaborated with us on projects/papers that were built around ResilientDB.
But, the 20 contributors visible on github are the ones who worked on
Everything we have done including research/papers and outcome of
development have been open for years. We simply wanted to keep the public
repo cleaner and we only released when we were certain that the new feature
is well tested and stable.
We will switch our development completely to our public
I just checked the GitHub issue and PRs of ResilientDB. There is
little discussion on the GitHub issue and review comments on GitHub
PRs.
Please keep Open Communications[1] in mind. We value transparency in
the ASF way. Internal development could block the contributions
outside of the organization
Thank you for your question.
With regards to the initial committers, over the years we had much larger
set of contributors who worked on the private repo of ResilientDB which
derives the research. Only when features are stable and well tested over
time, they have been advanced and promoted to our
Hi,
I have a quick question about the initial committers.
There are about 40+ initial committers, but I can only find about 20
contributors in the GitHub group[1] contributor list.
Could you explain the initial committer criteria?
There is a section of "Broader Contributing Members" in the
+1.
btw, I assume we will have an official vote thread (start with [VOTE])
later?
Thanks,
JP
Atri Sharma 于2023年10月3日周二 19:24写道：
> We want to propose ResilientDB as a new Apache Incubator project.
>
> ResilientDB[1] is a distributed blockchain framework that is written
> in C++ and integrates
+1 (binding)
Regards
JB
Le mar. 3 oct. 2023 à 13:23, Atri Sharma a écrit :
> We want to propose ResilientDB as a new Apache Incubator project.
>
> ResilientDB[1] is a distributed blockchain framework that is written
> in C++ and integrates with Byzantine Fault-Tolerant (BFT) and Crash
>
On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 2:24 PM Atri Sharma wrote:
>
> We want to propose ResilientDB as a new Apache Incubator project.
>
> ResilientDB[1] is a distributed blockchain framework that is written
> in C++ and integrates with Byzantine Fault-Tolerant (BFT) and Crash
> Fault-Tolerant (CFT) consensus
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 6:03 AM Uma Maheswara Rao Gangumalla
wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Regards,
> Uma
>
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 4:23 AM Atri Sharma wrote:
>
> > We want to propose ResilientDB as a new Apache Incubator project.
> >
> > ResilientDB[1] is a distributed blockchain
+1 (binding)
Regards,
Uma
On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 4:23 AM Atri Sharma wrote:
> We want to propose ResilientDB as a new Apache Incubator project.
>
> ResilientDB[1] is a distributed blockchain framework that is written
> in C++ and integrates with Byzantine Fault-Tolerant (BFT) and Crash
>
+1 (Binding)
-Ayush
On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 at 23:57, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
> The proposal looks solid
>
>
> --
> The Apache Software Foundation
> V.P., Data Privacy
>
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023, at 13:23, Atri Sharma wrote:
> > We want to propose ResilientDB as a new Apache
+1 (binding)
The proposal looks solid
--
The Apache Software Foundation
V.P., Data Privacy
On Tue, Oct 3, 2023, at 13:23, Atri Sharma wrote:
> We want to propose ResilientDB as a new Apache Incubator project.
>
> ResilientDB[1] is a distributed blockchain framework that is written
> in C++ and
+1 (binding)
On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 7:08 PM PJ Fanning wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> The project looks to have a big enough community and the proposal
> looks good. Best of luck.
>
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 at 17:52, Mohammad Sadoghi
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > On August 28, Calvin had done "a
+1 (binding)
The project looks to have a big enough community and the proposal
looks good. Best of luck.
On Wed, 4 Oct 2023 at 17:52, Mohammad Sadoghi wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> On August 28, Calvin had done "a quick check of the project name and there
> are no potential trademark issues." We
Dear all,
On August 28, Calvin had done "a quick check of the project name and there
are no potential trademark issues." We have all the necessary ICLAs
prepared and signed. I own the domain name ResilientDB.com and Git repo,
which I can transfer the ownership to Apache. There are no registered
We want to propose ResilientDB as a new Apache Incubator project.
ResilientDB[1] is a distributed blockchain framework that is written
in C++ and integrates with Byzantine Fault-Tolerant (BFT) and Crash
Fault-Tolerant (CFT) consensus protocols. Code is present at [2].
Key features:
Provides a
33 matches
Mail list logo
