Sorry if these questions have already been answered, but I'm still a bit confused, so if anybody can answer I'd be grateful.
Why is GA for podlings being considered before GA for TLPs? Or, is GitHub already generally available to TLPs, and I missed that? If I didn't miss anything, what are the arguments in favor of and against enabling this for podlings first? How does this relate to M.A.T.T.? Is that still being piloted, or is that now generally available to projects? Is this something different? Are we talking about granting PMCs admin on the repos, and committers write-access? Or, only PMC chair admin, or some other combination of access grants? Will this enable projects to manage GitHub issue labels and milestones? That's been really sorely lacking in the Fluo podling since we transitioned to incubation from our previous GitHub home, and it'd be *really* nice to get that working again. On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 6:47 PM Niall Pemberton <niall.pember...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm +1 to this for OpenWhisk. > I'm -1 to this as a general availability. > > There could be issues down the road which means that this option is > withdrawn. I'd hate to have alot of podlings with an expectation that were > later disappointed. > > Niall > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 9:50 PM, Chris Mattmann <mattm...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > As some of you may have seen the OpenWhisk podling being discussed now > has > > requested to use GitHub as its primary master. Greg Stein our ASF Infra > > Admin > > has OK’ed this for OpenWhisk iff the IPMC is OK with it. > > > > I ask now: > > > > 1. Is the IPMC OK with this for OpenWhisk? > > 2. Is the IPMC OK with this in general availability for Podlings? > > > > I am +1 on both (IPMC hat on). > > > > Thanks. > > > > Cheers, > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > >
