Amos, I'm not focused on you at all unless you're very beautiful women. So, please don't worry about that.
As i already described, since last graduation discussion, community improved/clarify contribution guide and review process and Committers are helping long living PR to be merged. And now resuming the discussion. That's my understanding of what happened. Best, moon On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:42 PM Amos B. Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Moon I don't think that's the question. The question is why are these > things still being delayed, and what happened to the last attempt to > graduate. You seem very focused on me. > > > On Feb 3, 2016, at 10:32 PM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Amos, > > > > I'm not sure why you taking me to want turn personal debate to you. > > I'm sure i don't want to have personal debate to you. > > > > I just wanted you share you reason why you think specific features are > > prerequisites. Can you share the reason why? > > > > Thanks, > > moon > > > >> On 2016년 2월 4일 (목) at 오후 12:01 Amos B. Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Moon please don't try to turn this into a personal debate with me. > >> Clearly, members of the community disagree with the way you see things. > >> > >>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 9:45 PM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> I shared why i specific features are not prerequisites of graduation > and > >>> why it's off-topic. Also alternative discussion thread that can be > >> handled. > >>> > >>> Amos, if you think specific features are prerequisites of graduation, > >>> please share the reason why. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> moon > >>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM Amos B. Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I think the community should be able to decide for itself what it > wants > >> to > >>>> talk about and I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to say that > >> part > >>>> of the discussion is off-limits. > >>>> > >>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 7:22 PM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi guys, > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of > >>>>> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a > >>>>> graduation goal. > >>>>> > >>>>> Including specific features could be valid concern for release > >>>> discussion, > >>>>> but i don't think it's related to a graduation. > >>>>> > >>>>> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in > >> my > >>>>> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation > >> vote > >>>>> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse. > >>>>> > >>>>> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and > >> review > >>>>> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many > >> contributions > >>>>> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially > Jongyoul > >>>> and > >>>>> Felix helped a lot) > >>>>> > >>>>> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to > >> the > >>>>> release / roadmap discussion. > >>>>> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such > as > >>>>> evaluating > >> > http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html, > >>>>> etc. > >>>>> > >>>>> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> moon > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg < > amos.elb...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not > >>>> withdrawn > >>>>>> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback > >> from > >>>> the > >>>>>> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's > >> the > >>>>>> last public discussion about graduation until today. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion > >>>> emails > >>>>>> that you're referring to. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <b...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Eran, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> thanks for sharing your oppinion! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle > and > >>>> let > >>>>>> us > >>>>>>> know if that makes sense to you? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but > >> after > >>>>>>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have > >>>> pre-request > >>>>>>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal > >>>> procedure > >>>>>> of > >>>>>>> graduation. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> [1] > >> > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <eranwit...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for > >>>>>> graduation > >>>>>>>> from day one. > >>>>>>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well. > >>>>>>>> +1 for graduation after we add both > >>>>>>>> Eran > >>>>>>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder < > >>>>>> sourav.mazumde...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in > >>>>>> different > >>>>>>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it > >> to > >>>>>> top > >>>>>>>>> level. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and > >> Authentication > >>>>>>>> added > >>>>>>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the > people > >>>> are > >>>>>>>>> eagerly waiting for. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>> Sourav > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion. > >>>>>>>>>> Let's start a vote. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>> moon > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov < > >> b...@apache.org > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like > >> to > >>>>>>>>>> suggest > >>>>>>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level > >>>>>>>> project. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE > >>>>>>>> thread > >>>>>>>>>>> here. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>> Alex > >> >
