The topic here is supposed to be an open, honest, objective evaluation of the project against the criteria in the checklist.
I would like us to stick to the subject. > > > QU10 The project is open and honest about the quality of its ... > > The project has been quite defensive concerning code quality, and > > everything else really. As just one example, when the CI issues > > were first reported, the response for some three months was > > "there can't be anything wrong so we won't bother looking." ... > 9/10 latest PR passes the CI. I don't think CI is broken. > If you think CI is broken for the whole project, you can always try > to fix and contribute. that will be appreciated. The issue is whether the project is "open and honest" about code quality. Or defensive (and hostile). CI isn't broken? How many PRs have been merged in the last month with a note to not worry that they don't pass CI because its broken? More than a month ago Moon personally committed to fix it, and NFlabs has a project to completely replace it because its so unstable. I think Moon has just proven my point. > > > QU20 The project puts a very high priority on producing secure > > > software. > I always asked people to contribute the security feature. multi-user > PR, too. Not really... Usually the answer was to refer people to NFlabs, or say its something that would be discussed in the future. There was an example on the User list yesterday. > And i always introduced and directed people to Shiro PR when they > need authentication even before it is being merged. If that were true then why was the PR was ignored for so long? The excuse in December was that the PR was forgotten about. > > > QU40The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility > > > and aims to document any incompatible changes and provide tools > > > and documentation to help users transition . . . > > There is no such documentation. There have been changes to, e.g., > > the. . . that broke code and broke installations, but were > > never documented. > > I think the belief is "there are no incompatibilities so there's > > nothing to document." > No. configuration always includes both old, new way of Spark > Integration since way Spark integration changes. That's not correct. In fact Moon and I had an e-mail exchange about this in August and September, and its been discussed several times in PR comments. This issue is *still* breaking builds for people, and it comes up on the user help list every few days. And that's just one issue. Moon has, again, made my point. > > > QU50The project strives to respond to documented bug reports in > > > > > > timely manner. > > 0.5.6 contained a patch for a bug where the PR was submitted in > > > > *September*, before even 0.5.5. Bug reports from multiple people > > and the PR were ignored -- until Twitter complained. > 0.5.6 for example includes 78 bug fixes. Not correct. Fixes to typos and grammar errors in documentation, and changes to the shading of windows, are not "bug fixes." In the 0.5.6 vote I asked if there were any substantive changes or bug fixes in 0.5.6. The twitter-bug was the only example that anyone was able to produce. Anyway, the question is still why that PR and the bug reports were ignored in September, October, November, before twitter complained? The issue is whether *the project* is responding to bug reports in a timely manner. My example shows that it is not. > > > LC40 Committers are bound by an Individual Contributor Agreement > > > (the "Apache iCLA") that defines which code they are allowed to > > > commit and how they need to identify code that is not their own. > > There is no way that Felix's conduct about 208 is consistent with > > the iCLA. In addition, Moon knew about that conduct, and didn't do > > anything about it. > If you want, you can always sign ICLA... > But basically, contributed code is committed by one of Zeppelin > Committer, who already signed ICLA. So signing ICLA for contributor > is not mandatory. Part of the iCLA is also *honesty* about the attribution of code. > > > CO20 The community welcomes contributions from anyone who acts in > > > > > > good faith and in a respectful manner and adds value to the > > > project. > Yes, acts in good faith and in a respectful manner. Is that a joke? One current member of the PMC tried to bully me into crediting him for work he hadn't done. Then tried to stall the PR while publicly claiming authorship. And another member of the PMC covered-up for him. > > > CO40The community is meritocratic and over time aims to give > > > more rights and responsibilities to contributors who add value to > > > the project. > > Since incubation began, the PMC has added only one committer who > > isn't an affiliate of NFLabs. That person is not a programmer and > > has made no contribution to the Zeppelin codebase. > We have invited 3 committer after incubation started and 2 committers > are out side of NFLabs and 1 committer from NFLabs. > Total 8 committers so far, from 4 different affiliation. Google says 6 are affiliated with NFLabs. Of the two who are not, one is Felix. > And non-code contribution is also very important (docs, marketing, > etc). It's even possible to become a committer with out code > contribution. That is true. But the question is whether the project is a 'meritocracy.' In this case, the non-programmer committer is Felix, a personal friend of Moon's who has a record of dishonesty. > > > CS50All "important" discussions happen asynchronously in written > > > form on the project's main communications channel. Offline, face -> > > to-face or private discussions that affect the project are also > > > documented on that channel. > > Absolutely not the case. Email chains available on request.> > > We do every discussion is in the mailing list. And publish result in > the mailing list. Even if there're discussion in the offline, like > discussion in the meetup, discussion in the conference, discussion in > personal email, we move that into the mailing list. There are examples mentioned already in this email chain... On Fri, 2016-02-05 at 20:36 +0000, moon soo Lee wrote: > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 2:37 AM Amos Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Since subtlety has not worked, I will now be blunter. > > > > The reason PR 208 has been delayed since August is that Felix > > Cheung > > demanded that I credit him as a co-author even though he hadn't > > done > > any work. > > > > When I refused, Felix privately contacted Moon, who is his friend, > > and > > claimed the PR contained Felix' intellectual property. Moon then > > held > > the PR at Felix' request. > > > > I found out what happened after I pursued Moon to ask why the PR > > had > > been ignored. When he told me what happened, I had to offer e-mail > > chains and commit logs to prove that Felix was lying. > > > > Since then, its been one bogus, junk reason for delay after > > another. > > For a while, this seems to be because Moon wanted to give Felix > > time to > > produce a competing implementation. Except, Felix wasn't able to > > do > > it. I caught him trying to pass-off code he'd stolen as his own, > > with > > Moon (who should have known) present. > > > > When I confronted Moon he told me, basically, "don't rock our > > boat." > > > > If anyone has any doubt about whether what I've said is true, I > > have the > > email chains, the commit logs, the chat records... > > > > I believe the reason PRs have been delayed is that they conflicted > > with > > other goals of either NFLabs, or friends of committers. Such as > > security > > PRs, when NFlabs offers multi-user functionality commercially and > > outside > > the project. > > > > > > > > > > > Here are my comments on the draft checklist: > > > > > QU10The project is open and honest about the quality of its code. > > > Various levels of quality and maturity for various modules are > > > natural and acceptable as long as they are clearly communicated. > > > Yes > > > > The project has been quite defensive concerning code quality, and > > everything else really. As just one example, when the CI issues > > were > > first reported, the response for some three months was "there can't > > be > > anything wrong so we won't bother looking." Now its acknowledged > > that > > CI is basically broken for the whole project. > > > > There are many such examples. > > > > > 9/10 latest PR passes the CI. I don't think CI is broken. > If you think CI is broken for the whole project, you can always try > to fix > and contribute. that will be appreciated. > > > > > > QU20The project puts a very high priority on producing secure > > > software. > > > Yes > > > > The evidence is otherwise. > > > > While many people ask about security features, the response has > > always > > been from the PMC "some day," with no progress made. When > > community > > members tried to contribute the code --- the Shiro PR was > > inexplicably > > delayed by 4+ months; and the reaction to the new multi-user PR > > already > > seems unusual, etc. > > > > Maybe the project intends to make security a priority in the > > future. > > But so far it has not. > > > > I always asked people to contribute the security feature. multi-user > PR, > too. > And i always introduced and directed people to Shiro PR when they > need > authentication even before it is being merged. > > And SSL support, securing cross origin access, etc, there're other > security > improvement effort that already been done and merged. > > I don't think project is not producing secure software. > > > > > QU40The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility > > > and > > > aims to document any incompatible changes and provide tools and > > > documentation to help users transition to new features. > > > Yes > > > > There is no such documentation. There have been changes to, e.g., > > the > > way Zeppelin has to be configured, the way Spark integrates with > > Zeppelin, etc., that broke code and broke installations, but were > > never > > documented. > > > I think the belief is "there are no incompatibilities so there's > > nothing to document." But that is not the case. > > > > > No. configuration always includes both old, new way of Spark > Integration > since way Spark integration changes. And it still does > > If you don't think it's enough, you can always contribute the > documentation. > > > > > QU50The project strives to respond to documented bug reports in a > > > timely manner.Yes > > > > 0.5.6 contained a patch for a bug where the PR was submitted in > > *September*, before even 0.5.5. Bug reports from multiple people > > and > > the PR were ignored -- until Twitter complained. > > > > This is just one example. > > > > > 0.5.6 for example includes 78 bug fixes. see > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=1231 > 6221&version=12334165 > I don't think bug fixes are ignored. > > You can always help fix the bug. Project does not officially discuss > on > twitter about the bug. > > > > > > LC40 Committers are bound by an Individual Contributor Agreement > > > (the > > > "Apache iCLA") that defines which code they are allowed to > > > commit > > > and how they need to identify code that is not their own. > > > Yes > > > > There is no way that Felix's conduct about 208 is consistent with > > the > > iCLA. In addition, Moon knew about that conduct, and didn't do > > anything > > about it. > > > > > If you want, you can always sign ICLA. > https://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt > > But basically, contributed code is committed by one of Zeppelin > Committer, > who already signed ICLA. > So signing ICLA for contributor is not mandatory. > > > > > CO20 > > > The community welcomes contributions from anyone who acts in good > > > faith and in a respectful manner and adds value to the project. > > > Yes > > > > See above. > > > > Yes, acts in good faith and in a respectful manner. > > > > > > > CO40The community is meritocratic and over time aims to give more > > > rights and responsibilities to contributors who add value to the > > > project. > > > Yes > > > > Since incubation began, the PMC has added only one committer who > > isn't > > an affiliate of NFLabs. > > > > That person is not a programmer and has made no contribution to the > > Zeppelin codebase. > > > > > We have invited 3 committer after incubation started and 2 committers > are > out side of NFLabs and 1 committer from NFLabs. > > Total 8 committers so far, from 4 different affiliation. > > And non-code contribution is also very important (docs, marketing, > etc). > It's even possible to become a committer with out code contribution. > > > > > > CO50 > > > The way in which contributors can be granted more rights such as > > > commit access or decision power is clearly documented and is the > > > same > > > for all contributors. > > > Yes > > > > See above. > > > > CS50All "important" discussions happen asynchronously in written > > form > > > on the project's main communications channel. Offline, face-to > > > -face > > > or private discussions that affect the project are also > > > documented on > > > that channel. > > > Yes > > > > Absolutely not the case. Email chains available on request. > > > > > We do every discussion is in the mailing list. And publish result in > the > mailing list. Even if there're discussion in the offline, like > discussion > in the meetup, discussion in the conference, discussion in personal > email, > we move that into the mailing list. > > > > > > IN10The project is independent from any corporate or > > > organizational > > > influence. > > > Yes > > > > I'm not so sure... > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2016-02-04 at 23:50 +0000, moon soo Lee wrote: > > > I have filled out all checklists and commented as much as i can. > > > > > > Please review > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZEPPELIN/Apache+Zeppe > > > lin+ > > > Project+Maturity+Model > > > . > > > > > > Did i filled out correctly? Any feedback would be really > > > appreciated. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > moon > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:03 AM moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I have created > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZEPPELIN/Apache+Zep > > > > peli > > > > n+Project+Maturity+Model and > > > > trying to fill out Apache Maturity Model checklist. > > > > > > > > Let me notify this thread when everything is filled out. > > > > And any comment, help would be appreciated. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > moon > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 3:55 AM Roman Shaposhnik < > > > > ro...@shaposhnik.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > In general I agree. That said, if one of you guys were to > > > > > fill > > > > > out the > > > > > Apache Maturity Model > > > > > checklist that would help frame the IPMC discussion. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Roman. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Mina Lee <mina...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I think Zeppelin meets the requirements for graduation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Zeppelin community is growing fast and getting more > > > > > > diverse. > > > > > > Number of > > > > > > contributors has increased more than 7 times and three new > > > > > > committers > > > > > are > > > > > > admitted since Zeppelin became Apache podling project. And > > > > > > release, vote > > > > > > related discussions have adopted ASF way so far. > > > > > > Also Zeppelin is the one of the projects making big synergy > > > > > > with other > > > > > > apache projects by providing different back-end > > > > > > interpreters(ex > > > > > > spark, > > > > > > hive, flink, hbase, cassandra, etc) > > > > > > > > > > > > so +1 for graduation. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:13 AM, madhuka udantha < > > > > > madhukaudan...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 for graduation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:59 PM, DuyHai Doan < > > > > > > > doanduy...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was reading the link provided by Leemoonsoo about the > > > > > > > > Apache > > > > > project > > > > > > > > maturity model. ( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturit > > > > > y-mo > > > > > del.html > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > QU20 The project puts a very high priority on > > > > > > > > > producing > > > > > > > > > secure > > > > > software > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's related to security and I know that there is a > > > > > > > > commit > > > > > > > > on Shiro > > > > > > > > authentication already by hayssams (kudo to him by the > > > > > > > > way). There is > > > > > > > also > > > > > > > > some JIRA ticket to add documentation about Kerberos ( > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-zeppelin/pull/640). > > > > > > > > Don't know > > > > > if > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > is a JIRA to add doc for Shiro yet. Anyway, on the > > > > > > > > chapter > > > > > > > > of > > > > > security, > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > the works are being done and are on good way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Under the Community topic, I think all the points are > > > > > > > > covered (for > > > > > > > example, > > > > > > > > becoming a committer (point CO50) is clearly documented > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > CONTRIBUTING.md) > > > > > > > > as well as consensus (point CO60). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Under the Consensus Building chapter, every discussion > > > > > > > > related to > > > > > release > > > > > > > > or votes have been exposed so far publicly on the > > > > > > > > mailing > > > > > > > > list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As far as I see, all the points are covered. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now my personal opinion as a community member is that > > > > > > > > it's > > > > > > > > high > > > > > time for > > > > > > > > the project to graduate. Until now I did not feel > > > > > > > > comfortable > > > > > advising > > > > > > > > Zeppelin for customers to deploy in production because > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > lack of > > > > > > > security > > > > > > > > but since security support (at least for > > > > > > > > authentication) is > > > > > > > > in the > > > > > trunk > > > > > > > > and the improvements are on the way, I don't see any > > > > > > > > blocker anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So a big +1 for me > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Ahyoung Ryu < > > > > > > > > ahyoungry...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Totally agree with @anthonycorbacho. I think it's > > > > > > > > > time to > > > > > > > > > graduate > > > > > and > > > > > > > > step > > > > > > > > > forward. > > > > > > > > > So, ++1 ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2016년 2월 4일 목요일, Anthony Corbacho< > > > > > > > > > anthonycorba...@apache.org>님이 > > > > > 작성한 > > > > > > > 메시지: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I dont see any reason why we shouldn't start a > > > > > > > > > > vote. > > > > > > > > > > unlike release, it doesnt require any specific > > > > > > > > > > features > > > > > > > > > > (For > > > > > specific > > > > > > > > > > feature like R or ACL, we can add it as a > > > > > > > > > > requirement > > > > > > > > > > for the > > > > > first > > > > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > > as TLP), > > > > > > > > > > so for me its a big +1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Victor Manuel > > > > > > > > > > Garcia < > > > > > > > > > > victor.gar...@beeva.com <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > > > > > > In my opinion we can graduate from the incubator. > > > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > > > think we > > > > > all > > > > > > > well > > > > > > > > > > > controlled procedures, regardless of new features > > > > > > > > > > > that also > > > > > will be > > > > > > > > > > > improved or adding . For example we need to > > > > > > > > > > > greatly > > > > > > > > > > > improve the > > > > > > > > > > > documentation, but i since is not necesary for > > > > > > > > > > > graduation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 for graduation > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > congrats for the work...!!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2016-02-04 9:13 GMT+01:00 Alexander Bezzubov < > > > > > > > > > > > b...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > <javascript:;>>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jakob, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thank you for pointing this out, it is exactly > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > describe > > > > > > > > (there > > > > > > > > > > > were > > > > > > > > > > > > 3 releases since joining the incubator) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we could keep this thread focused on > > > > > > > > > > > > graduation > > > > > > > > > > > > and get > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > oppinions > > > > > > > > > > > > from other participants - that would awesome! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Its great to see people volonteering to help > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > > > particular > > > > > > > > features > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > the next release here, but please feel free to > > > > > > > > > > > > fork > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > thread > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > further > > > > > > > > > > > > discussion on technical details. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 08:51 Jakob Homan < > > > > > > > > > > > > jgho...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey all- > > > > > > > > > > > > > A data point and observation from an ASF > > > > > > > > > > > > > Member and > > > > > > > Incubator > > > > > > > > > PMC > > > > > > > > > > > > > Member... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moon is correct that readiness for > > > > > > > > > > > > > graduation > > > > > > > > > > > > > is a > > > > > function > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > community development and adherence to the > > > > > > > > > > > > > Apache > > > > > > > > > > > > > Way, > > > > > rather > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > > > > > specific feature or tech milestones. Since > > > > > > > > > > > > > entering > > > > > Incubator, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Zeppelin's had two relatively easy releases, > > > > > > > > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > > > > > finished > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > incubation checklist > > > > > > > > > > > > > (http://incubator.apache.org/projects/zeppeli > > > > > > > > > > > > > n.ht > > > > > > > > > > > > > ml), has > > > > > > > added > > > > > > > > > new > > > > > > > > > > > > > commiters, etc. In short, Zeppelin's in a > > > > > > > > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > > > > > > position to > > > > > > > > > graduate > > > > > > > > > > > > > from my perspective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Resolution of specific PRs should be > > > > > > > > > > > > > handled > > > > > > > > > > > > > in a speedy > > > > > > > > matter, > > > > > > > > > > > > > but there doesn't seem to be any disagreement > > > > > > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > > that - > > > > > just > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > > work > > > > > > > > > > > > > left to be done in getting them in. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Jakob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3 February 2016 at 23:39, Amos B. Elberg < > > > > > > > > amos.elb...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see a point to splitting it. The > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reason > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we didn't > > > > > > > merge > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > December is that bugs in CI prevented the > > > > > > > > > > > > > tests > > > > > > > > > > > > > *in* 208 > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > functioning. > > > > > > > > > > > > > It wasn't causing anything else to fail. Now > > > > > > > > > > > > > CI > > > > > > > > > > > > > is broken > > > > > for > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > project > > > > > > > > > > > > > anyway. If it was going to be split, I would > > > > > > > > > > > > > do > > > > > > > > > > > > > that > > > > > myself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The reliability of the code has been proven > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the field: > > > > > > > > People > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > > > > > > > > > > don't use R have switched to the version of > > > > > > > > > > > > > 208 > > > > > > > > > > > > > in my repo > > > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > > > compiles reliably when 0.5.6 does not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This has been outstanding since August, and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's very > > > > > hard to > > > > > > > > > > > > understand > > > > > > > > > > > > > a reason - you even participated in a Meetup > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > September > > > > > > > where a > > > > > > > > > > > variant > > > > > > > > > > > > > of the code in the PR was used as a > > > > > > > > > > > > > demonstration > > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > Zeppelin's > > > > > > > > > > > > > capabilities and potential. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Part of being an Apache project is dealing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > significant > > > > > > > PRs > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > outside the core development team. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Addressing > > > > > > > > > > > > > these issues > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > R, > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > Prasad's PR, seems like a good test of > > > > > > > > > > > > > project > > > > > > > > > > > > > maturity. > > > > > These > > > > > > > > > were > > > > > > > > > > > > > features on the roadmap which were supposed > > > > > > > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > > > > > > > included > > > > > > > before > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > first > > > > > > > > > > > > > non-beta release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Feb 4, 2016, at 12:50 AM, moon soo Lee > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < > > > > > m...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Sourav for interest in this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > discussion > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and very > > > > > > > > valuable > > > > > > > > > > > > opinion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I completely agree how much R and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Authentication (which > > > > > i > > > > > > > > > believe > > > > > > > > > > > > > already > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in Zeppelin) will be useful for users. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > believe me, I > > > > > > > want > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > features in Zeppelin more than anyone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But at the same time we have diversity of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > user bases. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some people might think supporting > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > general > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > JDBC is more > > > > > > > > > practical > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > useful feature, the other can think multi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -tenancy is the > > > > > > > most > > > > > > > > > > > > important, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > etc, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, i believe Apache Top Level project is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > defined by how > > > > > > > > > community > > > > > > > > > > > > > works, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not defined by what feature does the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > software > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > includes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding bringing R into main branch, I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tried to make > > > > > pr208 > > > > > > > > > > passes > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > CI. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I could able to make it pass 1 test > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > profile, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > couldn't > > > > > > > make > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > > pass > > > > > > > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > other test profiles. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm suggesting split the contribution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smaller > > > > > peaces > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > merge > > > > > > > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one. Like Hayssam did it for his > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > contribution > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of Shiro > > > > > > > > security > > > > > > > > > > > > > integration > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (pr586). And I'm volunteering making > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pr208 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > into smaller > > > > > PRs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > moon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:11 PM Sourav > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mazumder < > > > > > > > > > > > > > sourav.mazumde...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This does make sense Moon. Completely > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > agree > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with you > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > features > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > important for becoming a top level > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > project > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, in my opinion, from the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > practical > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > usage > > > > > > > standpoint, > > > > > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > > these > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > two features Zeppelin does not look to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > me a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > full > > > > > fledged > > > > > > > top > > > > > > > > > > level > > > > > > > > > > > > > project. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Curious whether there are any technical > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > glitches which > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > impediment > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bringing these features to the main > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > branch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wondering > > > > > if > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > > > help > > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > > help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to get those problems fixed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sourav > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 4:22 PM, moon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > soo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lee < > > > > > > > > m...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > > > > > > > > > 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-maturit > > > > > y-mo > > > > > del.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 <javascript:;>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 <javascript:;>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > #Gra > > > > > duating+from+the+Incubator > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Witkon < > > > > > > > > > eranwit...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 <javasc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ript > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :;>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 <javascript:;>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 <javascript:;> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > *Victor Manuel Garcia Martinez* > > > > > > > > > > > *Software Engeenier > > > > > > > > > > > * > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *+34 672104297 | victor.gar...@beeva.com <javasc > > > > > > > > > > > ript > > > > > > > > > > > :;> < > > > > > > > > > > marta.ta...@beeva.com <javascript:;>>* > > > > > > > > > > > * | > > > > > > > victormanuel.garcia.marti...@bbva.com > > > > > > > > > > <javascript:;> > > > > > > > > > > > <marta.ta...@bbva.com <javascript:;>>* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <http://www.beeva.com/> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > Madhuka Udantha > > > > > > > http://madhukaudantha.blogspot.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
