On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 10:49 AM Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi John > > My understanding is, that we are well aware of this concern, which others > have mentioned as well. > > Also Greg noted in the proposal: > > > gstein sez: the podling can only graduate within an approved repository > system. The IPMC may have a differing opinion, but from an Infra > perspective: the OpenWhisk podling can continue with their usage of a > GitHub repository, but faces a clear obstacle: GitHub "as master [as > allowed by the Foundation]" must be approved and working before the > graduation, or they must migrate their primary to the Foundation's Git > repository (at git-wip) before they graduate. > I would like to get other IPMC members to weigh in on this comment, before I comment. Greg is the Infra Admin, he is an IPMC member but that's obligatory. He is explicitly stating that the IPMC may have an opinion other than his own. > > I think this sounds like a good compromise to work on and the poddling > intends to work actively with Infra to see that we can stay in GitHub. If > that is not possible, we byte the bullet accordingly. > > In addition, also according to Greg: > > > We require that anybody committing to a GitHub repository authenticates > with BOTH: GitHub, and the ASF. No commits without that multiple > authentication. (this is based on our current experiments with Whimsy and > Traffic Server; same rules would apply to this podling) > > The original discussion took place after the initial submission, see [1] > > Does that help ? > > Regards > Felix > > [1] > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/1c22a29b69e944ee725278aae05bd41dea80d10d0d204c26eb4cb24c@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E > > > Am 04.11.2016 um 15:20 schrieb John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>: > > > > I raised the concern over using github as the primary repo. This is > still > > unresolved, as I understood it. > > > > John > > > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:36 AM Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@adobe.com> > wrote: > > > >> Hi all > >> > >> I have made some additions to the OpenWhisk Proposal [1]: > >> > >> - restructured the API Gateway references: It is expected > >> that the API Gateway will be refactored with additional > >> code donated by IBM during incubation. > >> - added a note on the API Gateway’s dependency on OpenSSL > >> - added a note on Trademarks IBM is currently pursuing and > >> intends to transfer to ASF > >> - fixed some typos > >> > >> With these changes and no discussions over the course of the recent > weeks, > >> I would propose we could could vote for OpenWhisk to become an > incubating > >> project over the course of next weeks. > >> > >> Of course we are still open to welcome interested people to become > initial > >> committers to OpenWhisk Servlerless Runtime and API Gateway ! > >> > >> WDYT ? > >> > >> Regards > >> Felix > >> > >> [1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenWhiskProposal > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >> > >
