Thank you, Moon, I appreciate that. I've tried to give some deep thought over the last couple of days to clarifying, for myself, what my concern has been. Cos' email of the other day was particularly helpful, and I took his points to heart.
In my view, there are two concerns, which are distinct. One of them is a graduation issue, and one of them is not. The one that is a graduation issue, concerns the diversity of the PMC, and whether graduation is being rushed. The project still is largely centered around one individual and company. The size of *code* contributions from outside is vanishingly small. Whether the number of "independents" on the PMC is 1 or 2, is beside the point. I think that's reflected in the path that these disagreements took. I think its also reflected in a startling *lack*of disagreement on the mailing list in general. It isn't necessarily *bad* for a project to center around one person, and that one person did contribute most of the code. But it does suggest that as an *Apache* project, perhaps it needs more time to mature. As an example, since incubation began, I don't think we've added any *programmers* to the PMC who aren't affiliated with the same company. Why? As another example, I don't think we ever discussed what to do about having fallen behind the roadmap. Instead of looking at how to get to meet our standard, we adjusted the standard. I think the project would benefit from an opportunity to catch up to its own goals. Let the codebase become more diverse, reflecting code (not just documentation and 3d party interpreters) from a wider range of the community. And the community should have a chance to show that it is able to have, and resolve, healthy disagreements on its own. On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:49 PM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: > Amos, > > As you see, other PPMC started helping your PR. I hope that makes you feel > more comfortable. > > Also I'd like to take your concern about zeppelin's graduation more > seriously. > > So, could you list out your official concern about the zeppelin's > graduation? > > Then me and other PPMC are willing to answer. > > > One thing i want to ask is, actually having and express concern is very > good thing and encouraging. It is part of community diversity, right? But > let's keep in mind that other people is also free to have different > opinion. > > With this respect, i'll be happy to continue the discussion. > > Thanks, > moon > > On 2016년 2월 6일 (토) at 오전 11:58 Amos Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Moon - Are you now actually claiming that, even if what I'm saying is > true > > (which it is) that Felix' conduct is acceptable to the project? > > > > (As for how I know Felix never wrote anything on his own, there's a > record > > on github.) > > > > > I have asked Felix to help review in your PR. Actually not only Felix > but > > > others, too. Hope that's not a problem for you, because of reviewing > code > > > is open for everyone. > > > > "Review" is not the same thing as "manage," "supervise," "oversee." > Felix > > claimed you had put him *in charge* of it. You've never denied this. > > > > The story you're giving doesn't make any sense. Your version works > > something like this: > > > > Your friend contacted you to say that a PR submitted by a new contributor > > contained material stolen from him. You decided to ignore the PR, until > > the new contributor contacted you. When you heard his story, you asked > both > > sides to try to move on. But, immediately after that, you asked your > > friend to "supervise" the new contributor. While that was happening, you > > went to an event where you saw your friend present an alternative version > > of what the contributor had done. But, you didn't say "hey buddy, I > asked > > you to help that guy out with this, why are you doing a competing version > > instead?" > > > > What I think happened, is that Felix was trying to make a code > contribution > > because he wanted to become a committer, and he wanted the R work to be > his > > contribution, but he wasn't able to do it because he doesn't know how to > > code. I think you were trying to help your friend out, and that's why you > > asked him to "supervise" the work. I think after I refused to work > further > > with Felix, you intended to just ignore the whole thing until it went > away. > > Which, honestly, it would have - except that people found the work on > my > > repo through google and it accumulated users. I think the stuff since > has > > been a cover for what happened before. > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:39 PM, moon soo Lee <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Amos, i'm not sure how you can so sure about other people is lying and > > not > > > so straight and stealing your work. > > > > > > You maybe have little bit of misunderstanding in Apache open source > > > project. > > > > > > Normally, not a individual contributor / committer 'own' a source code. > > The > > > code belongs to ASF in my understanding. And if you help people and > > > 'contribute' code and involve project, everyone in the community > > recognize > > > your effort and that's how you get credit in the opensource project. > Not > > by > > > claimming ownership of the single piece of source code. So anyone has > > > absolutely no reason to steal your work. > > > > > > And committers are not manager who manages CI. CI is part of opensource > > > project and it's open to everyone for improvement. > > > Of course committer is willing to help, like I volunteered look in to > > your > > > brach to test CI, but basically you can do it yourself, too. Nothing > > stops > > > it. > > > > > > Also zeppelin community did not organized that seattle meetup last year > > and > > > i had been invited. So i should say 3rd party meetup. > > > > > > Hope this help you look project in a different view. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > moon > > > > > > On 2016년 2월 6일 (토) at 오전 9:35 Amos Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > No Moon, you're not being straight about this. > > > > > > > > The subject here is the maturity of the project. Part of that is the > > > > conduct of two members of the PMC. > > > > > > > > I am now sharing publicly what I have been trying to resolve > privately > > > > for months. > > > > > > > > > I think CI stability is not a problem for graduation. . . CI has > > > > > no problem in general. > > > > > > > > What *is* a problem for the project (graduation or not) is whether > the > > > > project is *OPEN AND HONEST ABOUT CODE QUALITY*. > > > > > > > > CI is an example where the response has been defensiveness and denial > > > > rather than openness or honesty. There is another example below: > > > > > > > > > I must say clearly, pr208 is not merged because of it does not pass > > > > > ci test, not because of CI is broken. Please don't confuse. > > > > > > > > That is absolutely false. > > > > > > > > Many PRs have been merged even though they broke CI. With PR 208, the > > > > only part that fails CI are the new tests *OF PR 208*. If the tests > > > > weren't there, CI would pass. > > > > > > > > It was *me* who insisted on fixing CI for merger! And Moon has > > > > admitted that the problem is not in the PR - it's in CI. Moon > > > > personally promised in December to fix it. > > > > > > > > > I don't see anyone in the community try to steal your work. You > > > > > always pointing Felix but he said he used his own work. > > > > > > > > And I showed you the commit record, which proved that he was lying. > > > > > > > > > Zeppelin community is not judging what happened in a 3rd party > > > > > meetup. > > > > > > > > Third party? Moon, you were a participant! It was part of your own > > > > presentation! > > > > > > > > And it was made at a time when you had "officially," supposedly, > asked > > > > Felix to "supervise" the PR. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 2016-02-05 at 23:59 +0000, moon soo Lee wrote: > > > > > Amos, > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for opinion. > > > > > > > > > > I think CI stability is not a problem for graduation. > > > > > CI sometimes break, but always fixed and back online in a day. CI > has > > > > > no > > > > > problem in general. > > > > > > > > > > I must say clearly, pr208 is not merged because of it does not pass > > > > > ci > > > > > test, not because of CI is broken. Please don't confuse. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see anyone in the community try to steal your work. You > > > > > always > > > > > pointing Felix but he said he used his own work. > > > > > > > > > > Zeppelin community is not judging what happened in a 3rd party > > > > > meetup. > > > > > > > > > > Please go to law court with your evidence if you think someone > stole > > > > > your > > > > > work for the presentation for the meetup. That's better instead of > > > > > complaining in graduation discussion thread. > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > moon > > > > > > > > > > On 2016년 2월 6일 (토) at 오전 7:44 Amos Elberg <amos.elb...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > 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+Z > > > > > > > > > eppe > > > > > > > > > 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-mat > > > > > > > > > > > urit > > > > > > > > > > > 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/6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 40). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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/zep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > peli > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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-mat > > > > > > > > > > > urit > > > > > > > > > > > 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:;> >
