Re: [VOTE] Release Wink 1.0 (RC-5)

[ant elder]

Looks good to me +1

   ...ant

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Nicholas L Gallardo wrote:

> Thanks Leo, your input is much appreciated.
>
> In addition to this +1, we received a +1 from Kevan Miller in the Wink
> community vote. Is that vote transportable here? If so, then we just need
> one more +1 to release as the vote has already been open for 72 hours.
>
>
>
>
> Nicholas Gallardo
> WebSphere - REST & WebServices Development
> nlgal...@us.ibm.com
> Phone: 512-286-6258
> Building: 903 / 5G-016
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for Leo Simons ---11/09/2009 06:38:57 AM---+1
> from me!]Leo Simons ---11/09/2009 06:38:57 AM---+1 from me!
>
>
> *Leo Simons *
>
> 11/09/2009 06:38 AM
> Please respond to
> general@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> To
>
> general@incubator.apache.org
> cc
>
>
> Subject
>
> Re: [VOTE] Release Wink 1.0 (RC-5)
>
> +1 from me!
>
> cheers,
>
> Leo
>
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Nicholas Gallardo
>  wrote:
> > The Wink community has voted on and approved the release
> > of Wink 1.0 (RC-5).  We would now like to request the
> > approval of the Incubator PMC for this release.
> >
> > Details of the Wink community vote can be found here:
> > http://n2.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Wink-1-0-RC-5-td3936613.html#a3936613
> >
> > The Maven staging area is at:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-011/
> >
> > The distributions are in:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-011/org/apache/wink/apache-wink/1.0-incubating/
> >
> > This release is tagged at:
> >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wink/tags/wink-1.0-incubating/  
> (revision
> 832289)
> >
> > The vote will be open here for at least 72 hours.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Nick
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Wink 1.0 (RC-5)

[ant elder]

Yep, I agree with what Kevan just said, so you're good to go now.

   ...ant

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Nicholas L Gallardo wrote:

> Thanks Ant. Do you have any input on the question below?
>
> > Is that vote [mentor/IPMC member] transportable here?
>
>
>
>
> Nicholas Gallardo
> WebSphere - REST & WebServices Development
> nlgal...@us.ibm.com
> Phone: 512-286-6258
> Building: 903 / 5G-016
>
> [image: Inactive hide details for ant elder ---11/09/2009 08:43:50
> AM---Looks good to me +1]ant elder ---11/09/2009 08:43:50 AM---Looks good
> to me +1
>
>
> *ant elder *
>
> 11/09/2009 08:42 AM
>  Please respond to
> general@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> To
>
> general@incubator.apache.org
> cc
>
>
> Subject
>
> Re: [VOTE] Release Wink 1.0 (RC-5)
>
> Looks good to me +1
>
>   ...ant
>
> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Nicholas L Gallardo  >wrote:
>
> > Thanks Leo, your input is much appreciated.
> >
> > In addition to this +1, we received a +1 from Kevan Miller in the Wink
> > community vote. Is that vote transportable here? If so, then we just need
> > one more +1 to release as the vote has already been open for 72 hours.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Nicholas Gallardo
> > WebSphere - REST & WebServices Development
> > nlgal...@us.ibm.com
> > Phone: 512-286-6258
> > Building: 903 / 5G-016
> >
> > [image: Inactive hide details for Leo Simons ---11/09/2009 06:38:57
> AM---+1
> > from me!]Leo Simons ---11/09/2009 06:38:57 AM---+1 from me!
> >
> >
> > *Leo Simons *
> >
> > 11/09/2009 06:38 AM
> > Please respond to
> > general@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
> > To
> >
> > general@incubator.apache.org
> > cc
> >
> >
> > Subject
> >
> > Re: [VOTE] Release Wink 1.0 (RC-5)
> >
> > +1 from me!
> >
> > cheers,
> >
> > Leo
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Nicholas Gallardo
> >  wrote:
> > > The Wink community has voted on and approved the release
> > > of Wink 1.0 (RC-5).  We would now like to request the
> > > approval of the Incubator PMC for this release.
> > >
> > > Details of the Wink community vote can be found here:
> > >
> http://n2.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Wink-1-0-RC-5-td3936613.html#a3936613
> > >
> > > The Maven staging area is at:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-011/
> > >
> > > The distributions are in:
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-011/org/apache/wink/apache-wink/1.0-incubating/
> > >
> > > This release is tagged at:
> > >
> >
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wink/tags/wink-1.0-incubating/
> (revision
> > 832289)
> > >
> > > The vote will be open here for at least 72 hours.
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > -Nick
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Request for Waiver of "Make a Release" requirement for Incubator graduation

[ant elder]

On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Greg Stein  wrote:
> Hello IPMC,
>
> The Subversion podling would like a waiver of the requirement to make
> a release before graduation.
>
> As we understand this requirement, it is present in order to
> demonstrate to the podling how releases are made at the ASF.
> Packaging, licensing, signing, placement into the distrubtion/mirror
> system, announcements, among others[1]. We believe that the Subversion
> community already has a deep understanding of the Apache release
> model, based on the following qualifications of several of its
> committers/mentors:
>
> * Greg Stein has been a committer at Apache since before the
> Foundation was started. He has been involved in releases of httpd and
> APR, including time as Release Manager (RM) for APR. He helped to
> establish the APR TLP and the Commons TLP (prior incarnation; now
> defunct). Greg wrote the versioning guidelines for APR, which are also
> in use by the Subversion project. Through his 8+ years on the Board,
> he has read and reviewed reports from across the ASF about release,
> IP, and infrastructure issues.
>
> * Justin Erenkrantz has been a committer since 2001, contributing to
> httpd and APR, along with mentoring the stdcxx project when it was in
> the Incubator. He has been the RM for both httpd and APR. In fact,
> Justin wrote the initial guidelines for the release of httpd. Justin
> has been part of Infrastructure almost since its inception as a
> distinct group, which includes the provision of all the facilities to
> actually make and distribute ASF releases. Justin has spent many years
> on the Board, providing further insight to releases across the
> Foundation.
>
> * Sander Striker has been a committer since 2001, contributing to APR
> and then httpd. Sander acted as the RM for httpd releases, and also
> held a stint as the VP for httpd. Add in his time spent with
> Infrastructure and the Board, and he's been observing ASF releases for
> many years.
>
> * Garrett Rooney has been a committer since 2004, contributing and
> making releases of APR, and committing to httpd. He was also the VP of
> APR for several years, and has mentored two Incubating projects.
>
> * Daniel Rall has been a committer since 2001, contributing to many
> projects: Turbine, Fulcrum, Torque, and numerous Jakarta Commons
> projects. He established the community around XML-RPC, brought it
> through the Incubator, and maintained it for several years within the
> XML Project. He also participated in some of the bootstrapping around
> the Velocity and Maven prtingojects, and participated on the Infra team.
>
> The Subversion community's belief is that we have ample experience to
> guide us in making a release, when that time is arrives. There will
> certainly be variances (e.g. mirroring) from our current established
> procedures[2], but some simple fine-tuning should resolve that. The
> bulk of the existing release process already meets and exceeds that a
> typical Apache release. Niclas Hedman pointed out that the Subversion
> community has produced 32 releases over the past four years, which
> hopefully indicates a smooth, understood, and functional release
> process.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> [1] one particular item is using a release as a gating/focal point for
> legal review, but we feel that can be performed as an action
> separate/distinct from performing a release
> [2] http://subversion.tigris.org/release-process.html
>

-0

I'm not at all familiar with how the Subversion project works so as an
IPMC member I don't see how I can decide this before they've even
started incubating. This is a graduation issue, why can't it just wait
until then and say in the graduation proposal there's not been a
release but its not necessary because of x y z.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Review-Then-Commit

[ant elder]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Daniel Kulp  wrote:
>
> As Martijn alluded to, I think we'd need some more context as to why and how
> they use RTC.
>

This appears to be where it came from:

 http://markmail.org/message/d45dmasuwnda25wd

so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
and since then 99% of the commits have been made by only two people.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Review-Then-Commit

[ant elder]

I agree with that. And before graduation I think it might be worth
trying to get CTR used more, they do seem open this -
http://markmail.org/message/i255ekzxpuesow44

   ...ant

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:16 AM, Greg Stein  wrote:
> Not a "strong opinion", but I think that RTC hampers the free-flow of
> ideas, experimentation, evolution, and creativity. It is a damper on
> expressivity. You maneuver bureaucracy to get a change in. CTR is
> about making a change and discussing it. But you get *forward
> progress*.
>
> I also feel that RTC will tend towards *exclusivity* rather than the
> Apache ideal of *inclusivity*. That initial review is a social and
> mental burden for new committers. People are afraid enough of
> submitting patches and trying to join into a development community,
> without making them run through a front-loaded process.
>
> I've participated in both styles of development. RTC is *stifling*. I
> would never want to see that in any Apache community for its routine
> development (branch releases are another matter).
>
> My opinion is that it is very unfortunate that Cassandra feels that it
> cannot trust its developers with a CTR model, and pushes RTC as its
> methodology. The group-mind smashes down the creativity of the
> individual, excited, free-thinking contributor.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:09, Matthieu Riou  wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> What's the take of other mentors and the IPMC on podlings practicing RTC?
>> I'm asking because some seem to see it as a blocker for graduation whereas I
>> see it much more as a development methodology with little community impact
>> and therefore no real influence on graduation. Strong opinions here?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Matthieu
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Review-Then-Commit

[ant elder]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Eric Evans  wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 07:16 +0000, ant elder wrote:
>> so about 6 months ago to try to help with problems they were having,
>> and since then 99% of the commits have been made by only two people.
>
> I assume you're referring to Jonathan Ellis and myself, and I'm not sure
> that's exactly fair. There are only 4 active committers, and of the 4,
> Jonathan and I spend the most time committing patches contributed by
> people who can't, and quite often the "review" was conducted by someone
> else who doesn't have commit rights and we are simply acting as a proxy.
> This results in a lot of svn commits made by us, for contributions that
> are not technically ours.
>
> As a convention, we typically put something like "Patch by $author;
> reviewed by $reviewer for $issue_id" in the change description. I just
> went through the commits scraping out those messages and it looks like
> Jonathan and I account for a little more than 60%, not 99%.
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> eev...@rackspace.com
>

So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
by others - great - why not make some of those others committers?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Review-Then-Commit

[ant elder]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Ellis  wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:24 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>> So about 40% of the committed code is coming from others and reviewed
>> by others - great - why not make some of those others committers?
>
> It's a long tail sort of thing.
>
> We follow the convention Johan suggested of assigning the Jira issue
> to the author of the change, so e.g. for 05 the contributions look
> like this: 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ConfigureReport.jspa?versionId=12314040&issueStatus=all&selectedProjectId=12310865&reportKey=com.sourcelabs.jira.plugin.report.contributions%3Acontributionreport&Next=Next
>

That JIRA report shows a range of contributors that many TLPs would be
envious of, and it shows a quite different picture from the commit
history, eg:

http://www.svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?from=20090801&to=20091231&path=%2Fincubator%2Fcassandra

It would be great to get more of those contributors actually doing the
commits though, maybe modifying the current commit process as is being
suggested in this thread could help get that to happen.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] release Apache VCL 2.1

[ant elder]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Kevan Miller  wrote:
>
> On Nov 23, 2009, at 11:10 AM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 23/11/2009, Andrus Adamchik  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Nov 23, 2009, at 5:49 PM, sebb wrote:
>>>
>>>
 There is only a "bz2" archive.
 Normally projects release archives in zip andr tar.gz format which are
 more commonly supported.

 IMO, this is a release blocker

>>>
>>> Just curious why you think this is a blocker? Each project knows better
>>> what formats are common and acceptable in the target user community. There's
>>> no single distribution format and this is not a blocker IMO.
>>
>> The project OS targets include Windows, which does not support BZ2
>> natively by default, whereas Windows does now support Zip archives.
>>
>> AFAIK, all other ASF releases use both tar.gz and zip archives.
>
> Personally, I don't see how this is a blocking issue. It is unusual. However, 
> I leave it up to the VCL community to decide what archive format is meeting 
> the needs of their users.
>

I agree with that, maybe it would be worth looking at having tar.gz
and zips in later releases but this doesn't seem to me like a blocker
for this one. I've reviewed the release artifacts and they look ok to
me so +1 on the release.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Accept Apache Clerezza into the incubator

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür
 wrote:
> Please vote on accepting Apache Clerezza for incubation at the Apache
> Incubator. The full proposal is available at the end of this message and
> as a wiki page at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ClerezzaProposal
> . We ask the Incubator PMC
> to sponsor it, with Bertrand as the Champion, and Gianugo, Niclas, Ross,
> Karl and Reinhard volunteering to be Mentors.
>
> Please cast your votes:
>
> [ ] +1, bring Clerezza into Incubator
> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> [ ] -1, do not bring Clerezza into Incubator, because...
>
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and only votes from the Incubator
> PMC are binding.
>
> - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Abstract
>
> Clerezza is an OSGi-based modular application and set of components
> (bundles) for building RESTFul Semantic Web applications and services.
>
> Proposal
>
> Clerezza can be used as a platform providing all the compile and runtime
> requirement for building semantic applications, or used as individual
> bundles within an OSGi framework, e.g. Apache Sling, Apache ServiceMix,
> or the Eclipse platform.
>
> Clerezza provides:
>
>    * An API modeling the W3C RDF standard without any vendor specific
> additions.
>    * Adapter for various triple stores including Sesame, Jena TDB, and
> Mulgara.
>    * Front-End adaptors, currently to run applications written against
> the Jena API. Support for RDF2Go is planned.
>    * A JAX-RS implementation designed to work in an OSGi environment
> and allowing to provide Root-Resources as OSGi services.
>    * Web access to RDF graphs, including a SPARQL-Endpoint.
>    * Extensions to JAX-RS allowing to bind Root-Resource classes to
> specific RDF-Types rather than to URI-Paths.
>    * Templating mechanism (Renderlets) allowing to render RDF resources
> returned by JAX-RS resource methods to various formats
>    *
>
>      Support for Scala for writing modules, ScalaServerPages to easily
> write renderlets, DSL for accessing graphs.
>    * Authentication and authorization based on JAAS and OSGi
> Conditional Permission Admin
>    * Support for user bundles: Users can have a permission to upload
> their own sandboxed bundles. The URI space these bundles are allowed to
> register their JAX-RS resources can be limited with a prefix.
>    * Scripting: Scripting based on javax.script (currently support for
> JRuby and Scala)
>    * Documentation: Bundles can provide their documentation in RDF.
> These are used for online documentation as well as for building Maven
> sites (with a Maven reporting plugin)
>
> The RDF abstraction layer can be used independently of other aspects of
> Clerezza. It allows applications to be written regardless the used
> backend. In its purpose, it is similar to RDF2Go, but provides a
> significantly more modular interface allowing e.g. to independently
> switch the storage, querying, or serialization layer. Furthermore, it
> doesn't introduce concepts alien to the RDF model such as blank node
> labels, but is in its core strictly limited to RDF semantics.
>
> The JAX-RS implementation can also be used independently of any other
> components. It allows OSGi services to provide a RESTful interface to
> their methods. By being based on wymiwyg WRHAPI, it can run both on the
> default OSGi Web Service as well as on a jetty instance listening on a
> different port.
>
> Background
>
> The current web trends focusing on information sharing, interoperability
> and collaboration. Therefore the behaviour of the end-user has changed
> over the last years: end-users not only consuming information they also
> producing content anytime anywhere - in contrast to non-interactive
> websites where users are limited to the passive viewing of information
> that is provided to them. Since the end-users are sensitized to the
> possibilities of the web the web application requirements increases.
> Examples of such applications are social-networking sites, wikis, blogs
> and mashups.
>
> The REST paradigm and Semantic Web technologies support these trends and
> form the basis for the upcoming Web of Data (a.k.a. linked data, Web
> 3.0). They change the paradigms for developing complex Web applications.
> Clerezza allows to develop applications that integrate perfectly in the
> Semantic Web providing all accessible resources in machine
> understandable formats without imposing additional burdens on the
> developer. Additionally, thanks to the flexibility of the RDF model used
> as back-end, some tedious database related tasks required for
> traditional Web application development are no longer needed.
>
> Rationale
>
> Most Web application framework are not designed to leverage the full
> power of HTTP but often try to reproduce non Web design patterns for the
> Web environment. In general, application frameworks are oriented towards
> relational or hierarchical data structures. While attempts to ove

Re: Where to add PPMC member additions?

[ant elder]

I'm not sure I've ever seen PPMC members listed anywhere, the only way
i've found them is from the subscribers to the poddlings private list.

   ...ant

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 7:02 PM, Paul Querna  wrote:
> ping? anyone know the answer?
>
> I can't find the file referenced, nor can I find any other file where
> PPMCs are supposed to keep their list updated?
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Leif Hedstrom  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> reading http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html, it says (towards the
>> end) to add new PPMC members to this SVN file:
>>
>>    https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/board/incubator-info.txt
>>
>>
>> but, I get a 404 not found on that URL. Where do I add new PPMC members for
>> our project (Traffic Server) ? I'll update our incubator page with the
>> committer additions we're making, but I want to make sure I update
>> everything as required here.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -- leif
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] release cassandra 0.5.0-beta1

[ant elder]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 6:40 PM, Eric Evans  wrote:
>
> The Cassandra community voted on and approved the release of Apache
> Cassandra 0.5.0-beta1. We would now like to request the approval of the
> Incubator PMC for this release.
>
> Cassandra is a massively scalable, eventually consistent, distributed,
> structured key-value store.
>
> Podling vote thread:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.devel/586
> 0.5.0-beta1 artifacts: http://people.apache.org/~eevans
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/cassandra/tags/cassandra-0.5.0-beta1
> Project home: http://incubator.apache.org/cassandra/
> Incubation status: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/cassandra.html
>
> We received one binding vote during the poddling vote, so we'll need 2
> more. Any help with reviewing/voting from outside our mentors list would
> be appreciated.
>
> The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or longer if needed).
>
> Regards,
>
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> eev...@rackspace.com
>
>

+1

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release RC3 as Log4PHP 2.0.0

[ant elder]

On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Curt Arnold  wrote:
> The log4php PPMC vote was opened on log4php-dev at Nov 27, 2009 and closed at 
> Dec 4, 2009.  Binding +1 votes were received from Christian Grobmeier, 
> Christian Hammers and Curt Arnold.  No other votes were received.
>
> The link in the original thread ends at the end of November.  The PPMC 
> release vote thread  continues 
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200912.mbox/%3cded132f10912050048u695e1353ta29b54a39e620...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
> I did raise a concern on a previous RC that the phpdoc generated 
> documentation does not have an ASF source header notice, but 
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#notes-license-headers
>  implied that it may not be a hard requirement.
>
> I would encourage any PHP developers to double check the PEAR packaging and 
> particularly in terms of consistency with other Apache PHP projects.
>
>
>
> On Dec 5, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
>> Dear Incubator PMC,
>>
>> the Log4PHP has voted with 3x +1 for releasing RC3 as Log4PHP 2.0.0
>> (please see below).
>>
>> The original vote message can be found:
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/logging-log4php-dev/200911.mbox/%3cded132f10911262256j12c0cfej21e7e5dbdcf18...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>>
>> Message ID is: ded132f10911262256j12c0cfej21e7e5dbdcf18bf7
>>
>> We kindly ask the incubator PMC to vote on our artifacts too:
>>
>> [ ] +1 Yes go ahead and release the artifacts
>> [ ] -1 No, because...
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Christian
>>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

+1

Note that the date in the NOTICE files is 2004-2007. There was a long
discussion on the date format on legal-discuss not so long ago and
from what i recall this is not a release blocker.

Also there's a bunch of html files in docs\log4php that don't have an
Apache License header, it wasn't obvious if they are generated or not
but it could be worth seeing if the header can be added to them.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] release cassandra 0.5.0-beta2

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Eric Evans  wrote:
> The Cassandra community voted on and approved the release of Apache
> Cassandra 0.5.0-beta2. We would now like to request the approval of the
> Incubator PMC for this release.
>
> Cassandra is a massively scalable, eventually consistent, distributed,
> structured key-value store.
>
> Podling vote thread: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.devel/696
> 0.5.0-beta2 artifacts: http://people.apache.org/~eevans
> SVN tag: 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/cassandra/tags/cassandra-0.5.0-beta2
> Project home: http://incubator.apache.org/cassandra/
> Incubation status: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/cassandra.html
>
> We received two binding votes[1][2] during the poddling vote, so we'll need 1
> more. Any help with reviewing/voting from outside our mentors list would be
> appreciated.
>
> The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or longer if needed).
>
> Regards,
>
>
> [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.devel/700
> [2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.devel/702
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> eev...@rackspace.com
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation

[ant elder]

A quick search so there has been some discussion on commons-dev - [1]

Does this really need to be incubated - the proposal says its intended
to graduate to Apache Commons and replace the existing Validator 1.x
component as a new 2.0 codebase, from the discussion on commons-dev
everyone seems fine with that out come, and only 2 of the 7 proposed
committers are not existing Validator or ASF committers - so couldn't
this just go straight to commons as a code grant and make the two new
guys committers in recognition of contibuting the new code?

  ...ant

[1] 
http://apache.markmail.org/search/?q=jsr+303+list%3Aorg.apache.commons.dev#query:jsr%20303%20list%3Aorg.apache.commons.dev%20order%3Adate-backward+page:1+state:facets


On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:06 AM, Matthias Wessendorf  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what about the effort from the Jakarta/Commons Validator community?
> Aren't they doing that as well ? (or was it only stated to do so)?
>
> -Matthias
>
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:14 AM, Donald Woods  wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I would like to present an incubator proposal for a new Validation podling,
>> which would be a JSR-303 Bean Validation follow-on to the existing Apache
>> Commons Validation 1.x project, but based on a new incoming codebase with a
>> software grant from Agimatec GmbH.
>>
>> The proposal is available on the wiki at:
>>
>>   http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ValidationProposal
>>
>>
>> We're looking forward to your feedback and interest in anyone wanting to
>> join and help out on the project.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Donald
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation

[ant elder]

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Niall Pemberton
 wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:56 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>> A quick search so there has been some discussion on commons-dev - [1]
>>
>> Does this really need to be incubated - the proposal says its intended
>> to graduate to Apache Commons and replace the existing Validator 1.x
>> component as a new 2.0 codebase, from the discussion on commons-dev
>> everyone seems fine with that out come, and only 2 of the 7 proposed
>> committers are not existing Validator or ASF committers - so couldn't
>> this just go straight to commons as a code grant and make the two new
>> guys committers in recognition of contibuting the new code?
>
> I raised this on priv...@commons and reported back to d...@commons on
> that discussion here:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/lkyjl6gaxawspgdt
>
> In summary though, there was very little support to go that route and
> some objections.
>
> All commons components share the same set of mailing lists which makes
> it easier for PMC members to provide oversight for the 30+ components
> that live there. As part of this proposal we want to use the commons
> mailing lists for commits and discussion so that by the time this
> podling is ready to graduate the new committers and Commons PMC will
> have a better knowledge of each other and there will be no issue with
> voting in the new committers.
>
> The use of the commons mailing lists is in the proposal and was part
> of the vote held on d...@commons to sponsor this incubation effort:
>
> http://markmail.org/message/mqdft736b5vasezs
>
> Niall
>

>From the first email referenced was Roman ever asked if he'd mind
submitting patches for a while to earn Karma if the code did go
straight to commons? Seems a bit a of a shame to need to go the whole
incubation process just for one commit access.

Re the the poddling use the existing commons mailing lists its may be
worth pointing out this recent thread:
http://apache.markmail.org/message/ifinvq7wqmeoo5ix

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Thrift 0.2.0

[ant elder]

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Todd Lipcon  wrote:
> Hi Kevan,
>
> Responses below:
>
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Kevan Miller  wrote:
>>
>> What's the license for the file: doc/thrift.tex?
>>
>
> This was contributed by Facebook, and thus falls under the Facebook
> CLA as Apache 2.0 licensed. I'm not sure how it got missed in the
> license audit, but since it's only part of the source tree, doesn't
> link with anything (solely documentation), and actually doesn't get
> installed by "make install", is it a release blocker? (ie do I need to
> roll an rc1 and call a new vote on thrift-dev, or can I just fix it in
> svn for next release?)
>

I think its ok to add that header later, and the rest of it looks ok
to me so +1 from me.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Cassandra PPMC?

[ant elder]

On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
 wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 5:27 AM, Matthieu Riou  
> wrote:
>> ...Podlings PPMCs are reflected somewhere in asf-authorization? How so? In 
>> any
>> case Eric is part of the Cassandra PPMC and I can co-sign if necessary
>
> Is there a public list of PPMC members somewhere?
>
> I haven't found it at either
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/cassandra.html or
> http://incubator.apache.org/cassandra/
>
> -Bertrand
>

The PPMC is a bit of an artificial construct so AFAIK there is no
place where PPMC membership is recorded, usually the only record of it
is in the poddlings private list archive. The list of subscribers to
the private list gives an indication though there'll also be all the
mentors and possibly other ASF members included in that list that need
to be sifted through.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] OpenCMIS incubator for Content Mangement Interoperability Services (CMIS)

[ant elder]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Niclas Hedhman  wrote:
> The Board has in the past condemned "balkanization" of community, and my
> take on this situation is exactly that.
>
> This is not "yet another web framework", which often brought forward as
> examples that the ASF encourages competition within. Those typically have a
> different "angle", "approach" or "metaphor", something making each very
> different beasts. But in this case we are talking about "the same spec".
> There is no real distinguishing features and huge overlap of commonality.
>
> I think this is a NIH-syndrome in play, in the best case "oh we have the
> code working already" and the worst case "we don't like to collaborate with
> them", and there is reason to think that that goes for both sides of the
> fence.
>
> I want to see Chemistry capable to absorb such contribution and collaborate
> heavily to bring such codebase in.
> And I want to see the people of the OpenCMIS proposal to show that they
> indeed can work with others.
>
> Exactly how the merged community goes about with the technical integration
> is its own business, but I am worried that the new codebase will not receive
> the welcome I hope, the Chemistry base will dominate, and the OpenCMIS
> proposer get fed up and leaves. Important Mentors understand the risks here,
> and keep eyes extra open for attrition, domination and forceful
> consensus-seeking.
>

I agree with those sentiments.

> I think discussion should continue on Chemistry dev@ list. If agreement
> can't be reached there, then I am NOT in favor of incubating OpenCMIS
> separately and will vote -1 to such proposal. I will also form myself an
> opinion of how well Chemistry is trying to collaborate, and it may improve
> or deteriorate its status with me.
>

I don't think it would be helpful for either OpenCMIS or Chemistry for
the IPMC to just unilaterally dictate that "it must be done in
Chemistry". IMHO that would make for too unlevel a playing field which
could adversely impact any attempts to collaborate (or even just get
stuff done). That works both ways - it would be hard for OpenCMIS
being forced to be part of Chemistry, but also potentially hard for
Chemistry to all of a sudden have a significant number of new
committers forced upon them and upsetting the status quo.

The Incubator has always been very clear about having a very low bar
of entry to incubation so IMHO it shouldn't matter that the incoming
podling is doing the same spec as another poddling, thats something
that could be worked out during incubation. So I'd +1 accepting this
new OpenCMIS proposal (if they can find champion and mentors). If
we're really concerned about having multiple spec impls then we can
make this a graduation requirement - neither Chemistry or OpenCMIS
graduate until they've both worked out how to exist together.


> This can become an excellent opportunity for all involved to show off their
> ApacheWay skills
>

+1!

> -- Niclas
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] release cassandra 0.5.0-rc1

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Eric Evans  wrote:
>
> The Cassandra community voted on and approved the release of Apache
> Cassandra 0.5.0-rc1. We would now like to request the approval of the
> Incubator PMC for this release.
>
> Cassandra is a massively scalable, eventually consistent, distributed,
> structured key-value store.
>
> Podling vote thread:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.devel/728
> 0.5.0-rc1 artifacts: http://people.apache.org/~eevans
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/cassandra/tags/cassandra-0.5.0-rc1
> Project home: http://incubator.apache.org/cassandra/
> Incubation status: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/cassandra.html
>
> We received only one (IPMC )binding vote[1] during the poddling vote, so
> we'll need two more. Any help with reviewing/voting from outside our
> mentors list would be appreciated.
>
> The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or longer if needed).
>
> Regards,
>
> [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.devel/734
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> eev...@rackspace.com
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Validation incubator for JSR-303 Bean Validation

[ant elder]

On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Niall Pemberton
 wrote:


>
> This is not quite the scenario. We have a *dormant* component
> (validator) in Commons and a couple of ASF committers (not commons
> committers) have shown up proposing to re-write that component to
> implement the new "Bean Valiadation" specification. Recently one of
> those committers proposed adopting this existing code-base written by
> someone else which is already 80% complete. I was the last active
> committer on the Commons Validator component and all I'm trying to do
> is facilitate those that want to revive it and bring in the new code
> base. So its more a case of other people think Commons would be an
> appropriate home - so far none of the existing Commons committers has
> shown any interest in the codebase. Personally my interest in helping
> make this happen though is now dying 'coz this is way too painful.
>

It doesn't have to be painful. This thread has been running a few
weeks now if it really is wanted to be done in the Incubator just call
a vote on that now. The champion and mentors are Incubator PMC members
so it'll likely get enough +1s (though the vote might go more smoothly
if the part about using the commons mailing lists is removed). The
Commons PMC is effectively saying we don't want to take responsibility
and giving it to the Incubator PMC who from the comments on this
thread will likely think its ready to graduate almost immediately so
can vote to graduate it at the earliest opportunity and give it right
back to Commons. Making work for ourselves but so be it. It doesnt
look like theres been any comments about this on commons dev or
private since the proposal was submitted to the Incubator so it may be
worth first asking there again if they'd review this thread and
reconsider not doing it via the software grant route.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] release cassandra 0.5.0-rc3

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Eric Evans  wrote:
> The Cassandra community voted on and approved the release of Apache
> Cassandra 0.5.0-rc3. We would now like to request the approval of the
> Incubator PMC for this release.
>
> Cassandra is a massively scalable, eventually consistent, distributed,
> structured key-value store.
>
> Podling vote thread: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.devel/764
> 0.5.0-rc3 artifacts: http://people.apache.org/~eevans
> SVN tag:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/cassandra/tags/cassandra-0.5.0-rc3
> Project home: http://incubator.apache.org/cassandra/
> Incubation status: http://incubator.apache.org/projects/cassandra.html
>
> We received one (IPMC )binding vote[1] during the poddling vote, so we'll
> need at least a couple more here.
>
> The vote will remain open for 72 hours (or longer if needed).
>
> Regards,
>
>
> [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.devel/766
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> eev...@rackspace.com
>
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Olio 0.2

[ant elder]

+1

The Java src archive seems to include some of the binary artifacts (eg
webapp.war), the license/notice covers everything so its not an issue
just pointing it out in case its not intentional.

   ...ant

On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Shanti Subramanyam
 wrote:
> A reminder to please take a look at the Olio release and Vote.
>
> Thanks
> Shanti
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Shanti Subramanyam 
> Date: Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 5:39 PM
> Subject: [VOTE] Release Olio 0.2
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> The Olio community has voted to release Olio 0.2. We now request the
> Incubator PMC for a vote.
>
> The proposed release artifacts are located at
> http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.2.
> There are 3 versions (PHP, Rails and Java) in both binary and source
> formats. Each package is available in both tar and zip format and include
> asc and md5 checksums. The file names should be self-explanatory.
>
> The rat outputs are in *rat-0.2.out.
>
> The link to the voting thread can be found here :
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200912.mbox/browser
>
> Please do review the artifacts and we would appreciate it if you could cast
> your vote by Jan 12.
>
> Thanks in advance
> Shanti
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Fw: [VOTE] Imperius 1.0.0 rc6

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Neeraj Joshi  wrote:
> Hi All,
> We still need two more binding votes for our first release. Would really
> appreciate it if anyone can take some time to review our release.
> Thanks
> Neeraj
> ~
> "It is hard enough to remember my opinions, without also remembering my
> reasons for them". -Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
>
> Neeraj Joshi (knee-rudge)
> Apache Imperius - http://incubator.apache.org/imperius
> ~
> - Forwarded by Neeraj Joshi/Durham/IBM on 01/12/2010 10:28 AM -
>
> From:
> Neeraj Joshi/Durham/i...@ibmus
> To:
> general@incubator.apache.org
> Date:
> 12/14/2009 04:43 PM
> Subject:
> [VOTE] Imperius 1.0.0 rc6
>
>
>
> The Imperius community voted on and approved the release of Apache
> Imperius 1.0.0.
> We would now like to request the approval of the Incubator PMC for this
> release.
>
> Imperius is a rule-based policy evaluation engine based on the CIM-SPL
> language from
> Distributed Management Task Force (dtmf.org).
>
>
>  The Imperius 1.0.0  RC6 release candidate has been tagged, packaged,
>  and is ready for a vote. The artifacts, KEYS file, RAT report and release
>
>
>  notes can  be found at
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~jneeraj/apache-imperius-1.0.0-rc6/
>
>  The tag from which the release artifacts were generated can be found
>  at
>
>  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/imperius/tags/release1.0.0rc6/
>
>  Revision no is 887217
>
>  In addition, my PGP public code signing key can be found at the MIT
>  key server (http://pgp.mit.edu/)
>
>  The KEYS file is checked in at
> http://svn.apache.org.repos/asf/incubator/imperius/KEYS
>
>  Please vote to publish this release by Tuesday, Dec 17 18:00 EST.,
>  please include the testing you performed to arrive at your vote
>  [  ] +1 Publish
>  [  ]   0 Abstain
>  [  ] -1 Don't publish, because...
>
>
> Below is a summary of the vote on the Imperius mailing list (and further
> below is the original vote email)
>
> Thanks
> Neeraj
>
>
> ~
> Neeraj Joshi (knee-rudge)
>
> IBM WebSphere ComputeGrid
>
> Apache Imperius - http://incubator.apache.org/imperius
> ~
>
>
>
> From:
> Neeraj Joshi/Durham/i...@ibmus
> To:
> imperius-...@incubator.apache.org
> Date:
> 12/14/2009 03:45 PM
> Subject:
> [VOTE][RESULT] Imperius 1.0.0 rc6
>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> Voting on the Imperius 1.0.0rc6 candidate release has concluded
>
> Results:
> 1 binding +1 vote
>
>  6 non-binding +1 votes
>
> Kevan Miller(*) +1
>
> David Kaminsky +1
> David Wood +1
> Mark Carlson +1
> Erik Bengston +1
> Xiping Wang +1
> Jorge Lobo +1
>
> Comments received:
>
> 1. Comments from  Erik Bengston
>
>>- In the zip/tar file we have a /log.txt file that should be removed.
>>- Inside the jars we have a /META-INF/maven that should be removed too.
>>- imperius-splcore-1.0.0.jar does not have NOTICE.txt and LICENSE.txt
>>- IMO, the lib/javaspl-samples-1.0.0.jar should be moved to
>>samples/lib/javaspl-samples-1.0.0.jar
>>- IMO, NOTICE.txt and LICENSE.txt files in jar files should lie in
>>META-INF folder.
>
> It was concluded that it is too early to make all/any Apache Imperius
> artifacts available in the Maven
> repository
>
> The other issues did not violate Apache policies and would be accommodated
>
>
> in subsequent releases.
>
>
>
> 2.  Comments from Kevan Miller
>
>>I note that the source distribution contains the following file:
> imperius-cimsplclientsideprovider/customexpressions.properties which >is
> not in the svn tag. The contents of this file are:
>
>>SPL_CUSTOM_EXPRESSIONS
>>SPL_CUSTOM_ACTIONS
>
> This file is innocuous and gets generated during JUnit testing
>
>
> I will now take this vote to the general mailing list for a final vote.
> We still need 2 +1 votes from IPMC members.
>
> Thanks
> Neeraj
>
>
>
> ~
> Neeraj Joshi (knee-rudge)
> Apache Imperius - http://incubator.apache.org/imperius
> ~
>
>
>
> From:
> Neeraj Joshi/Durham/i...@ibmus
> To:
> imperius-...@incubator.apache.org
> Date:
> 12/04/2009 10:06 AM
> Subject:
> [VOTE] Imperius 1.0.0 rc6
>
>
>
>  Hi All,
>
>  The Imperius 1.0.0  RC6 release candidate has been tagged, packaged,
>  and is ready for a vote. The artifacts, KEYS file, RAT report and release
>
>
>
> notes can
>  be found at
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~jneeraj/apache-imperius-1.0.0-rc6/
>
>  The tag from which the release artifacts were generated can be found
>  at
>
>  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/imperius/tags/release1.0.0rc6/
>
>  Revision no is 887217
>
>  In addition, my PGP public code signing key can be found at the MIT
>  key server (http://pgp.mit.edu/)
>
>  The KEYS file is checked in at
> http://svn.apache.org.repos/asf/incubator/imperius/KEYS
>
>  Please vote to publish this release by Tuesday, Dec 08 18:00 EST.,
>  pleas

Re: [Discuss] Apache Shindig as a TLP

[ant elder]

I had a quick look at things like mailing list activity, votes,
releases, committers, commits etc, looks good to go to me.

   ...ant

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 7:41 PM, Upayavira  wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 12:04 -0500, Vincent Siveton wrote:
>> Hi folks
>>
>> FYI, the Shindig community has successfully voted for graduation [1].
>> If no objection on the charter or other, I will start a formal
>> acceptance vote soon.
>
> So, from the relative silence on this thread, I am assuming that
> everyone is quite happy to see Shindig graduate and that no-one has any
> issues...
>
> Regards, Upayavira
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Shindig as an Apache Top Level Project

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:41 AM, Vincent Siveton  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the positive feedback on the proposal to graduate Shindig
> as a TLP [1].
>
> I would like to start an official vote to recommend the graduation of
> Apache Shindig as a Top Level Project to the Board.
> To that end I have prepared the resolution for the Board below to be
> presented for consideration at the upcoming Board meeting.
>
> Community graduation vote thread:
> http://shindig-dev.markmail.org/message/c47amdxjtntkjij5
>
> Please cast your vote:
> [ ] +1 to recommend Shindig's graduation
> [ ] 0 don't care
> [ ] -1 no, don't recommend yet, because ...
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Vincent
>
> [1] http://apache.markmail.org/message/qvpyymihv6gyh5a7
>
> --- Begin Proposed Board Resolution ---
>
> WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests of the
> Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to establish a Project
> Management Committee, charged with the creation and maintenance of open-source
> software related to the implementation of an OpenSocial container and
> OpenSocial API specifications, for distribution at no charge to the public.
>
> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee (PMC), to
> be known as the "Apache Shindig PMC", is hereby established pursuant to Bylaws
> of the Foundation; and be it further
>
> RESOLVED, that the Apache Shindig Project be and hereby is responsible for the
> creation and maintenance of software related to the OpenSocial API
> specifications, based on software licensed to the Foundation; and be it 
> further
>
> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Shindig" be and hereby
> is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction of the
> Board of Directors as the chair of Apache Shindig, and to have primary
> responsibility for management of the projects within the scope of 
> responsibility
> of the Apache Shindig PMC; and be it further
>
> RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are 
> appointed
> to serve as the initial members of the Apache Shindig PMC:
>
> * Ian Boston (ieb at apache dot org)
> * Kevin Brown (etnu at apache dot org)
> * Chris Chabot(chabotc at apache dot org)
> * Chico Charlesworth (chico at apache dot org)
> * Cassie Doll (doll at apache dot org)
> * Evan Gilbert (evan at apache dot org)
> * John Hjelmstad (johnh at apache dot org)
> * Paul Lindner (lindner at apache dot org)
> * Daniel Peterson (dpeterson at apache dot org)
> * Louis Ryan (lryan at apache dot org)
> * Henning Schmiedehausen (henning at apache dot org)
> * Vincent Siveton (vsiveton at apache dot org)
> * Upayavira (upayavira at apache dot org)
> * Adam Winer (awiner at apache dot org)
>
> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Paul Lindner be appointed to the
> office of Vice President, Apache Shindig, to serve in accordance with and
> subject to the direction of the Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the
> Foundation until death, resignation, retirement, removal or disqualification, 
> or
> until a successor is appointed; and be it further
>
> RESOLVED, that Apache Shindig be and hereby is tasked with the migration
> and rationalization of the Apache Incubator Shindig podling; and be it
> further
>
> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache Incubator
> Shindig podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are hereafter
> discharged.
>
> --- End Proposed Board Resolution ---
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Imperius 1.0.0 rc6

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Neeraj Joshi  wrote:
> The Imperius community voted on and approved the release of Apache
> Imperius 1.0.0.
> We would now like to request the approval of the Incubator PMC for this
> release.
>
> Imperius is a rule-based policy evaluation engine based on the CIM-SPL
> language from
> Distributed Management Task Force (dtmf.org).
>
>
>  The Imperius 1.0.0  RC6 release candidate has been tagged, packaged,
>  and is ready for a vote. The artifacts, KEYS file, RAT report and release
>
>  notes can  be found at
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~jneeraj/apache-imperius-1.0.0-rc6/
>
>  The tag from which the release artifacts were generated can be found
>  at
>
>  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/imperius/tags/release1.0.0rc6/
>
>  Revision no is 887217
>
>  In addition, my PGP public code signing key can be found at the MIT
>  key server (http://pgp.mit.edu/)
>
>  The KEYS file is checked in at
> http://svn.apache.org.repos/asf/incubator/imperius/KEYS
>
>  Please vote to publish this release by Tuesday, Dec 17 18:00 EST.,
>  please include the testing you performed to arrive at your vote
>  [  ] +1 Publish
>  [  ]   0 Abstain
>  [  ] -1 Don't publish, because...
>
>
> Below is a summary of the vote on the Imperius mailing list (and further
> below is the original vote email)
>
> Thanks
> Neeraj
>
>
> ~
> Neeraj Joshi (knee-rudge)
>
> IBM WebSphere ComputeGrid
>
> Apache Imperius - http://incubator.apache.org/imperius
> ~
>
>
>
> From:
> Neeraj Joshi/Durham/i...@ibmus
> To:
> imperius-...@incubator.apache.org
> Date:
> 12/14/2009 03:45 PM
> Subject:
> [VOTE][RESULT] Imperius 1.0.0 rc6
>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
> Voting on the Imperius 1.0.0rc6 candidate release has concluded
>
> Results:
> 1 binding +1 vote
>
>  6 non-binding +1 votes
>
> Kevan Miller(*) +1
>
> David Kaminsky +1
> David Wood +1
> Mark Carlson +1
> Erik Bengston +1
> Xiping Wang +1
> Jorge Lobo +1
>
> Comments received:
>
> 1. Comments from  Erik Bengston
>
>>- In the zip/tar file we have a /log.txt file that should be removed.
>>- Inside the jars we have a /META-INF/maven that should be removed too.
>>- imperius-splcore-1.0.0.jar does not have NOTICE.txt and LICENSE.txt
>>- IMO, the lib/javaspl-samples-1.0.0.jar should be moved to
>>samples/lib/javaspl-samples-1.0.0.jar
>>- IMO, NOTICE.txt and LICENSE.txt files in jar files should lie in
>>META-INF folder.
>
> It was concluded that it is too early to make all/any Apache Imperius
> artifacts available in the Maven
> repository
>
> The other issues did not violate Apache policies and would be accommodated
>
> in subsequent releases.
>
>
>
> 2.  Comments from Kevan Miller
>
>>I note that the source distribution contains the following file:
> imperius-cimsplclientsideprovider/customexpressions.properties which >is
> not in the svn tag. The contents of this file are:
>
>>SPL_CUSTOM_EXPRESSIONS
>>SPL_CUSTOM_ACTIONS
>
> This file is innocuous and gets generated during JUnit testing
>
>
> I will now take this vote to the general mailing list for a final vote.
> We still need 2 +1 votes from IPMC members.
>
> Thanks
> Neeraj
>
>
>
> ~
> Neeraj Joshi (knee-rudge)
> Apache Imperius - http://incubator.apache.org/imperius
> ~
>
>
>
> From:
> Neeraj Joshi/Durham/i...@ibmus
> To:
> imperius-...@incubator.apache.org
> Date:
> 12/04/2009 10:06 AM
> Subject:
> [VOTE] Imperius 1.0.0 rc6
>
>
>
>  Hi All,
>
>  The Imperius 1.0.0  RC6 release candidate has been tagged, packaged,
>  and is ready for a vote. The artifacts, KEYS file, RAT report and release
>
>
> notes can
>  be found at
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~jneeraj/apache-imperius-1.0.0-rc6/
>
>  The tag from which the release artifacts were generated can be found
>  at
>
>  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/imperius/tags/release1.0.0rc6/
>
>  Revision no is 887217
>
>  In addition, my PGP public code signing key can be found at the MIT
>  key server (http://pgp.mit.edu/)
>
>  The KEYS file is checked in at
> http://svn.apache.org.repos/asf/incubator/imperius/KEYS
>
>  Please vote to publish this release by Tuesday, Dec 08 18:00 EST.,
>  please include the testing you performed to arrive at your vote
>  [  ] +1 Publish
>  [  ]   0 Abstain
>  [  ] -1 Don't publish, because...
>
>  Upon a positive majority of binding votes and no binding vetoes, the
>  results of this vote will be brought to the Incubator PMC and voted
>  upon there.
>
>  Thanks,
>  -Neeraj
>
> Change log:
> 1. Checked in the build.xml from the release artifact into the SVN tag.
> All the release artifacts
> from previous candidate (r5) are the same.
> 2. Updated the SVN revision number.
> 3. Left the redundant zip/gz files as is.
> ~
> "It is hard enough to remember my opinions, without also remembering my
> reasons for them". -Fried

Re: [Discuss] Apache Cassandra as a TLP

[ant elder]

I echo Matthieu's comments about Cassandra being ready to graduate,
I'll vote +1 for it in a vote. Not sure if that PMC list is actually
the complete list as I thought there was talk of adding others, i'll
ask about it on their private list.

   ...ant

On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Matthias Wessendorf  wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>  wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 2:25 AM, Matthieu Riou  
>> wrote:
>>> ...By the way if you have a few minutes, some feedback about the resolution
>>> that Eric attached would be cool...
>>
>> The resolution looks good to me, but the proposed PMC is really small:
>>
>>         * Jonathan Ellis            
>>         * Eric Evans                
>>         * Jun Rao                   
>>         * Chris Goffinet            
>>
>> And all of its members are currently active in Cassandra only.
>>
>> Would it be possible for (some of) the mentors to stay onboard for a while?
>> With only 4 PMC members to start with, the risk of being unable to get
>> 3 votes on issues is real.
>
> that's a good point, Bertrand. Those that are involved in other
> communities are the
> mentors, like Torsten, Matthieu or Brian (according to [1]). Looks like the 
> only
> exception is "Johan Oskarsson", but I am not to familiar with the
> community itself
> and its activity. However I noted that Johan voted for the graduation...
>
> I am also not sure why the proposed PMC is that small. Some try to expand
> their PPMC during incubation with all the active folks (mailings and commits).
> So, I am not sure on the reason why there is this "small" (P)PMC.
>
> -Matthias
>
> [1] http://people.apache.org/~jim/committers.html
>
>>
>> -Bertrand
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matthias Wessendorf
>
> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [Discuss] Apache Cassandra as a TLP

[ant elder]

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Eric Evans  wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> The Cassandra community has successfully voted for graduation[1]. Before
> calling for a recommendation vote, I'd like to see if anyone here has
> any concerns or objections, or has any feedback on the draft resolution.
>
> Regards,
>
> [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.user/1875
>

Other than the PMC makeup which is being taken care of one thing that
sometimes causes debate is the resolution words, so to highlight that
to try to avoid voting hiccups:

...creation and maintenance of open-source software related to fully
distributed storage of structured data, ...

Does anyone have any issues or comments with that?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release UIMA 2.3.0-rc9

[ant elder]

It is quite huge. I haven't looked at every artifact but the ones i
did all the licensing etc looked ok and it looks like they understand
what they're doing. The copyright in some NOTICE files is  "Copyright
2006, 2007" which could probably do with being updated, though others
are 2009 and from the discussion on legal-discuss a while back i'm not
sure thats a blocking issue so +1 from me.

  ...ant

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Jukka Zitting  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Jukka Zitting  
> wrote:
>> Others, please review and vote! The release is pretty complex so it's
>> a bit of work to review it, but it would be great if at least two
>> other IPMC members could spare some time on this.
>
> Anyone?
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Apache Cassandra to an Apache TLP

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Eric Evans  wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> We took the feedback from the earlier discussion[1] here and added our
> active mentors to the proposed PMC, (for a total of 7 people), then ran
> that through a new community vote[2].
>
> [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.general/24427
> [2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.cassandra.user/2157
>
> There didn't seem to be any other feedback, so I'd like to start an
> official vote to recommend graduation of Apache Cassandra to a top-level
> project.
>
> Please cast your vote:
> [ ] +1 to recommend Cassandra's graduation
> [ ]  0 don't care
> [ ] -1 no, don't recommend yet, (because...)
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> eev...@rackspace.com
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [Vote] Release Kato M1-incubating

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Stuart Monteith  wrote:
> The Kato community has voted to release Kato M1-incubating. We now request
> the
> Incubator PMC for a vote.
>
> The proposed release artifacts are located at:
>    http://people.apache.org/~monteith/kato/apache-kato-M1-incubating-RC3/
>
> There are packages for the Java binaries with documentation, source and
> native libaries for Linux and Windows x86.
> Each package is available in tar.gz and zip form, expect for the native
> packages.
> asc, md5 and sha1 (SHA512) files are generated for each.
>
> rat*.txt files have been generated for each of the packages contents. The
> mapping is:
>    apache-kat-M1-incubating-bin.(tar.gz|zip) - rat-bin.txt
>    apache-kat-M1-incubating-src.(tar.gz|zip) - rat-src.txt
>    apache-kat-M1-incubating-native-bin-linux-i386.tar.gz - rat-bin-linux.txt
>    apache-kat-M1-incubating-native-bin-windows-i386.zip -
> rat-bin-windows.txt
>
> Please review the artifacts and cast your vote by Thursday 4th February.
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>        Stuart Monteith
>
> --
> Stuart Monteith
> http://blog.stoo.me.uk/
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache libcloud 0.2.0

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Paul Querna  wrote:
> The Apache Libcloud project is currently voting on our first release,
> 0.2.0.  As required by Incubator policy, we need IPMC approval for
> this release.  There is a concurrent release vote ongoing on
> .
>
> The current (passing) RAT output can be seen at:
> 
>
> Test tarballs for Apache Libcloud 0.2.0 are available at:
>  
>
> Please test and place your votes please;
>
>  +/- 1
>  [  ]  Release Apache Libcloud 0.2.0
>
> Vote closes on Monday February 15, 2010 at 1pm PST.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] - Graduate Log4PHP as a subproject of Logging project

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 10:18 PM, Gav...  wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> The Log4PHP community has voted [1] with 5 +1 votes and no other votes as
> follows, to graduate to become a sub-project of the Logging Project.
>
> * Gavin McDonald
> * Christian Hammers
> * Jim Jagielski
> * Jesus Christian (non binding)
> * Christian Grobmeier
>
> The Logging PMC has voted [2] with 7 +1 votes and no other votes as follows,
> to accept Log4PHP as a sub-project.
>
> * Ceki Gülcü
> * Niclas Hedhman
> * Curt Arnold
> * Scott Deboy
> * Paul Smith
> * Ron Grabowski
> * Christian Grobmeier
>
> The Log4PHP community feels it has fulfilled all graduation requirements to
> become a sub-project.
>
> This vote is to ask that the IPMC approve the graduation of Log4PHP as a
> sub-project of Apache Logging.
>
> The vote starts now and will run for a minimum of 72 hours.
>
> [ ] - +1 - Graduate Log4PHP as a sub-project of Apache Logging.
>
> [ ] - +/-0 - Don't care, whatever the majority decides.
>
> [ ] - -1 - Strongly object to this graduation (because ...
>
> Thanks All,
>
> Gav...
>
> [1] - Message-ID:
> 
>
> [2] - Message-ID:
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha

[ant elder]

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Leif Hedstrom  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The Traffic Server PPMC has voted on and approved the release of TS
> v2.0.0-alpha. We would now like to request the approval from the Incubator
> PMC for this release. The original vote thread is
>
>    Message-ID: <4b8d5deb.2050...@apache.org>
>
>
> The release candidate artifact and checksums / signature can be found at:
>
>    http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha.tar.bz2
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha.tar.bz2.md5
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha.tar.bz2.sha1
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha.tar.bz2.asc
>
>
> The .asc signature is signed by me (Leif Hedstrom (CODE SIGNING KEY)
> ). The checksums are
>
>    md5sum: 18f914f3873bc4d22c5f3115b9db011f
>    sha1sum: f735a19a70c2aa69d97d4ea239a5192258dadf17
>
> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache
> trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha:
> [  ] +1 Publish
> [  ]   0 Abstain
> [  ] -1 Don't publish, because...
>
>
> Below is a summary of the vote on the mailing list.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Leif
>
>
> Subject:  [RESULT] [VOTE] Release candidate for Traffic Server 2.0.0-alpha
>
> The vote for release passes with six +1 votes, and no -1 or 0 votes. I  will
> request for the IPMC to release this.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -- leif
>
> [+1] Leif Hedstrom
> [+1] George Paul
> [+1] John Plevyak
> [+1] Bryan Call
> [+1] Jean-Frederic Clere
> [+1] Doug Cutting
>
>


I had a look. Unfortunately the main release artifact
apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha.tar.bz2 is missing the top
level LICENSE and NOTICE files. Those are mentioned in the README and
do look like they're in SVN so maybe there is just a problem with the
release build, but they are a requirement of every artifact being
released so i think you'll need a respin to fix that.

The key included at ~zwoop/ with the release artifacts that was used
to sign the artifacts does work ok but it doesn't look like thats
published in a public key server like http://pgp.surfnet.nl/ so doing
that would be good (though thats not a release requirement).

Other that everything looks good from the ASF/legal perspective and
the Incubator disclaimer is included in the README file.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha

[ant elder]

On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Leif Hedstrom  wrote:
> On 03/08/2010 05:09 PM, ant elder wrote:
>>
>> O
>>
>> I had a look. Unfortunately the main release artifact
>> apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha.tar.bz2 is missing the top
>> level LICENSE and NOTICE files. Those are mentioned in the README and
>>
>
> Are you sure? I just downloaded it (as linked above):
>
> loki (17:10) 258/0 $ wget
> http://people.apache.org/~zwoop/apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha.tar.bz2
> loki (17:10) 259/0 $ tar xf
> apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha.tar.bz2
> loki (17:10) 260/0 $ cd apache-trafficserver-incubating-2.0.0-alpha
> loki (17:10) 261/0 $ ls
> aclocal.m4  configure*    emacs-style  libinktomi++/  Makefile.am  rc/
> build-aux/  configure.ac  example/     librecords/    Makefile.in  README
> CHANGES     contrib/      INSTALL      LICENSE        NOTICE       STATUS
> ci/         doc/          iocore/      m4/            proxy/
> loki (17:10) 262/0 $ ls -lrt LICENSE
> -rw-r--r-- 1 leif users 19098 2010-02-09 20:41 LICENSE
> loki (17:10) 263/0 $ ls -lrt NOTICE
> -rw-r--r-- 1 leif users 776 2010-02-12 07:24 NOTICE
>
>
> What am I missing?
>

Thats odd, unless I'm going blind there is definitely no LICENSE file
when I have look. I'm using windows and winzip though, could that be
doing something funny when unzipping the .bz2 file?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache River 2.1.2

[ant elder]

Looks ok to me, +1.

As an aside there are still Java package names that are using com.sun
instead of org.apache, are they going to be changed before graduation
(I forget what the feeling is about this these days in the Incubator
PMC)?

   ...ant

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Jukka Zitting  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Jukka Zitting  
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Peter Firmstone  wrote:
>>> Please vote on releasing Apache River 2.1.2
>>
>> +1 (sorry for the delay)
>>
>> PS. IPMC members; we still need two more IPMC votes to make this
>> release official.
>
> Hmm, looks like I forgot to cc general@ on this.
>
> We're still lacking one IPMC vote to make this release official.
> Getting this release prepared was a huge effort and IMHO the biggest
> positive sign of community activity in River since the podling was
> started. Let's not stall the release for a missing IPMC vote!
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Termination of WSRP4J podling

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:37 AM, Ate Douma  wrote:
> The Portals PMC as Sponsor of the WSRP4J podling as well as the project
> community itself has voted [1,2] positive [3] to terminate the podling due
> to lack of interest to continue the project.
>
> I would like to call the Incubator PMC to ratify this decision. Please vote
> on terminating the WSRP4J podling:
>
> [ ] +1, terminate WSRP4J
> [ ] -1, do not terminate WSRP4J
>
> Here's my +1
>
> Regards,
>
> Ate
>
> [1]
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/portals-general/201004.mbox/%3c4bbe524b.4090...@douma.nu%3e
> [2]
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/portals-wsrp4j-user/201004.mbox/%3c4bbe524b.4090...@douma.nu%3e
> [3]
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/portals-general/201004.mbox/%3c4bc500fa.6060...@douma.nu%3e
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [libcloud] [VOTE] Release Apache Libcloud 0.3.1

[ant elder]

+1

One minor nit is the Changes file still talks about 0.3.0.

   ...ant

On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 12:09 AM, Paul Querna  wrote:
> Test tarballs for Apache Libcloud 0.3.1 are available at:
>  
>
> Please test and place your votes please;
>
>  +/- 1
>  [  ]  Release Apache Libcloud 0.3.1
>
> Vote closes on Monday May 10, 2010 at 1pm PST.
>
> This release fixes several issues related to the license blocks,
> NOTICE file, and test cases that were noticed in the scrubbed 0.3.0
> release.
>
> It is based upon this tag:
> 
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paul
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Empire-db 2.0.6-incubating (rc4)

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 8:17 PM, Martijn Dashorst
 wrote:
> +1 (again).
>
> Could someone from the IPMC take a look at the release? The team is
> eager to release it, but lacks 2 +1 binding votes.
>
> Martijn
>
> On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Rainer Döbele  wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Rainer
>>
>> Francis De Brabandere wrote:
>>> re: [VOTE] Release Apache Empire-db 2.0.6-incubating (rc4)
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> We have just prepared the fourth 2.0.6-incubating release candidate
>>> and we are now looking for approval of the IPMC to publish the release.
>>>
>>> PMC vote thread:
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-empire-db-
>>> dev/201004.mbox/browser
>>> We already have one binding vote.
>>>
>>> These are the major change from our previous 2.0.5-incubating release:
>>>
>>> - Code-Generator allows generation of Data Model code files for
>>> existing databases
>>> - Maven plugin for DB-Code-Generator
>>> - New example to demonstrate interoperability between Empire-db and
>>> Spring
>>> - Provided jars are now OSGi compatible
>>>
>>> Changelog:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/empire-db/tags/apache-empire-db-
>>> 2.0.6-incubating-rc4/CHANGELOG.txt?view=co
>>>
>>> Subversion tag:
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/empire-db/tags/apache-
>>> empire-db-2.0.6-incubating-rc4
>>>
>>> Maven staging repository:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheempire-db-
>>> 020/
>>>
>>> Distribution files are located here
>>> http://people.apache.org/~francisdb/empire-db/
>>>
>>> Rat report for the tag is available here:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~francisdb/empire-db/rat.txt
>>>
>>> Vote open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://www.somatik.be
>>> Microsoft gives you windows, Linux gives you the whole house.
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
> Apache Wicket 1.4 increases type safety for web applications
> Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.4.7
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Approval to release Apache Aries (Incubating) version 0.1-incubating

[ant elder]

On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Jeremy Hughes  wrote:
> The Aries community has voted on its first release. From the Aries home page:
>
> "The Aries project is delivering a set of pluggable Java components
> enabling an enterprise OSGi application programming model. This
> includes implementations and extensions of application-focused
> specifications defined by the OSGi Alliance Enterprise Expert Group
> (EEG) and an assembly format for multi-bundle applications, for
> deployment to a variety of OSGi based runtimes."
>
> Aries is a multi-module project. The vote thread on aries-dev for RC5:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-aries-dev/201005.mbox/%3cl2wadbf02b11005050801hdb720bfse0dd3f748f81a...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
> concluded with 14 votes, all of them +1, four of which were binding
> Incubator PMC votes from Jarek Gawor, Kevan Miller, Guillaume Nodet &
> Davanum Srinivas.
>
> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
> 941288.
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>
> parent
> eba-maven-plugin
> testsupport
> util
> blueprint
> jndi
> transaction
> web
> jmx
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-004/
>
> jpa
> samples
>
> Modules staged at
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-010/
>
> application
>
> The RAT and IANAL build checks passed.
>
> The KEYS file located here:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/KEYS
>
> contains the code signing key for myself, Jeremy Hughes, the release
> manager for this release.
>
> We already have 4 binding +1 IPMC votes on the aries-dev list, and I'm
> opening up this thread for 72 hours for any further feedback on the
> staged artifacts for release.
>
> Thank you,
> Jeremy
>

Its a slightly unusual release structure so apologies if I'm missing
it but where is the source release? If i'm not missing some other link
then something may have gone wrong in the release build,  as an
example, in the folder:

https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/org/apache/aries/blueprint/org.apache.aries.blueprint/0.1-incubating/

the source jar org.apache.aries.blueprint-0.1-incubating-sources.jar
is mostly empty and doesn't contain the source of
org.apache.aries.blueprint-0.1-incubating.jar.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Approval to release Apache Aries (Incubating) version 0.1-incubating

[ant elder]

Ok thanks I see them now.

Looks good to me, +1

   ...ant

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Jeremy Hughes  wrote:
> On 11 May 2010 07:19, ant elder  wrote:
>> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Jeremy Hughes  wrote:
>>> The Aries community has voted on its first release. From the Aries home 
>>> page:
>>>
>>> "The Aries project is delivering a set of pluggable Java components
>>> enabling an enterprise OSGi application programming model. This
>>> includes implementations and extensions of application-focused
>>> specifications defined by the OSGi Alliance Enterprise Expert Group
>>> (EEG) and an assembly format for multi-bundle applications, for
>>> deployment to a variety of OSGi based runtimes."
>>>
>>> Aries is a multi-module project. The vote thread on aries-dev for RC5:
>>>
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-aries-dev/201005.mbox/%3cl2wadbf02b11005050801hdb720bfse0dd3f748f81a...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>>>
>>> concluded with 14 votes, all of them +1, four of which were binding
>>> Incubator PMC votes from Jarek Gawor, Kevan Miller, Guillaume Nodet &
>>> Davanum Srinivas.
>>>
>>> The following Aries top level modules are staged and tagged in
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/tags/ at revision
>>> 941288.
>>>
>>> Modules staged at
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/
>>>
>>> parent
>>> eba-maven-plugin
>>> testsupport
>>> util
>>> blueprint
>>> jndi
>>> transaction
>>> web
>>> jmx
>>>
>>> Modules staged at
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-004/
>>>
>>> jpa
>>> samples
>>>
>>> Modules staged at
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-010/
>>>
>>> application
>>>
>>> The RAT and IANAL build checks passed.
>>>
>>> The KEYS file located here:
>>>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/aries/KEYS
>>>
>>> contains the code signing key for myself, Jeremy Hughes, the release
>>> manager for this release.
>>>
>>> We already have 4 binding +1 IPMC votes on the aries-dev list, and I'm
>>> opening up this thread for 72 hours for any further feedback on the
>>> staged artifacts for release.
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Jeremy
>>>
>>
>> Its a slightly unusual release structure so apologies if I'm missing
>> it but where is the source release?
>
> There are 12 top level modules, most with sub modules. For 'blueprint'
> the source-release.zip is here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/org/apache/aries/blueprint/blueprint/0.1-incubating/blueprint-0.1-incubating-source-release.zip
>
> The pattern is 
> /org/apache/aries///0.1-incubating/-0.1-incubating-source-release.zip
>
> If i'm not missing some other link
>> then something may have gone wrong in the release build,  as an
>> example, in the folder:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachearies-009/org/apache/aries/blueprint/org.apache.aries.blueprint/0.1-incubating/
>>
>> the source jar org.apache.aries.blueprint-0.1-incubating-sources.jar
>> is mostly empty and doesn't contain the source of
>> org.apache.aries.blueprint-0.1-incubating.jar.
>
> Each of the sub-modules contain sources jars. These are for the
> convenience of attaching to binaries in IDEs for example. The one you
> mention is for a sub-module which acts as a collector to collect up
> other sub-modules into a bundle. So it doesn't have any sources of its
> own, so I guess technically that sources jar isn't required.
>
>>
>>   ...ant
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Wink 1.1 (incubating)

[ant elder]

Looks ok to me, +1

   ...ant

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Mike Rheinheimer  wrote:
> I should have mentioned this,
>
> Wink 1.1 release already has two IPMC binding votes from:
>
> Davanum Srinivas
> Kevan Miller
>
> Wink 1.1. release needs only one more IPMC binding vote to pass.
>
> Thanks.
> mike
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Mike Rheinheimer  wrote:
>
>> IPMCers,
>>
>> Wink 1.1 release voting has completed successfully on the wink-dev list.
>> I'm now calling the IPMC vote to release Wink 1.1 (incubating) per the
>> process indicated here:
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-incubator-release-vote
>>
>> The Maven staging area is at:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-007/
>>
>> The distributions are in:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewink-007/org/apache/wink/apache-wink/1.1-incubating/
>>
>> This release is tagged at:
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wink/tags/wink-1.1-incubating
>> (revision 941046)
>>
>> The vote will be open here for at least 72 hours (ending Friday, May 14,
>> 10:45am US CST).  Please indicate your vote:
>>
>> [ ] +1 to release Wink 1.1 incubating
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1 NOT to release Wink 1.1 incubating (and why)
>>
>> Thanks!
>> mike
>>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Deltacloud Project

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:45 AM, David Lutterkort  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> after the discussion so far [1], I'd like to put Detlacloud for a vote
> for acceptance into the Apache Incubator according to the proposal[2]
>
> I _think_ I've added everybody who expressed interest in being a mentor
> or initial committer to the proposal - if I have forgotten anybody,
> please holler.
>
> Please reply to this mail with your vote.
>
> David
>
> [1] 
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201005.mbox/%3c1273174879.7253.99.ca...@avon.watzmann.net%3e
> [2] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/DeltacloudProposal
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release PhotArk M2-incubating (RC1)

[ant elder]

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Luciano Resende  wrote:
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Luciano Resende  wrote:
>> The PhotArk community has completed a vote on it's second milestone
>> release (PhotArk M2-Incubating) and  is now looking for IPMC approval
>> to publish the release.
>>
>> Please review and vote on approving the M2-incubating release
>> artifacts of PhotArk.
>>
>> The artifacts are available for review at:
>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende/photark/M2-incubating-RC1/
>>
>> This includes the signed binary and source distributions, the RAT report,
>> and the Maven staging repository.
>>
>> The release tag is available at :
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/photark/tags/M2-incubating-RC1/
>>
>> --
>
> Here is my +1, any others available to review the release ?
>
>

The distribution archives still contain SNAPSHOT in the name which may
be unintentional but its not a blocker and I don't see any others so
...

+1 from me.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Shiro version 1.0.0-incubating

[ant elder]

On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:32 PM, Kalle Korhonen
 wrote:
> This is the first incubator release for Apache Shiro, version
> 1.0.0-incubating. The release is made following the standard
> Apache/Maven release process as documented at
> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. This
> is a lazy consensus vote as we already received 3 binding IPMC +1
> votes for the PPMC release vote on shiro-dev.
>
> PPMC release vote thread:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-shiro-dev/201005.mbox/%3caanlktik_mke9dwlatmxnzq7kwcdbs3amsu5ulymkp...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
> The issues solved for 1.0.0 (after the project entered Apache incubator):
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310950&styleName=Html&version=12314078
>
> The tag to be voted upon:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/tags/shiro-root-1.0.0-incubating/
>
> Staging repo for binaries:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-005/
>
> Staging site:
> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating/
>
> Project website (just for informational purposes, not to be voted upon):
> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Lazy consensus, vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>

I can't find all the source for the release. AFAICT the only way to
recreate all the release artifacts would be from the svn tag but thats
not enough as an ASF release must include a source release. If I've
just missed it and all the source is there somewhere then could you
provide the link?

Two other comments are:

There is no incubation DISCLAIMER file in any of the release artifacts
which is required as per
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Releases.
That needs to be present either as a separate file next to the
LICENSE/NOTICE files or the text may be included in the top level
README, for an example see:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/kato/tags/apache-kato-M1-incubating/DISCLAIMER.txt
Looking back now we seem to be missing this in other releases recently
too so perhaps this could be fixed on the next release if there isn't
a new RC needed for anything else.

I don't think the NOTICE file needs those extra comments about
SoftHashMap and Spring, and perhaps the SoftHashMap comments would be
better in the LICENSE file. There has been a lot of confusion about
what should go in the NOTICE file and extra info is far better than
missing info so up to the project what if anything to do about this.

Other than that it looks good, the missing source is a problem though
so sorry but my vote is -1 until that is cleared up.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Shiro version 1.0.0-incubating

[ant elder]

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Alan D. Cabrera  wrote:
>
> On May 26, 2010, at 2:00 AM, ant elder wrote:
>
>> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:32 PM, Kalle Korhonen
>>  wrote:
>>> This is the first incubator release for Apache Shiro, version
>>> 1.0.0-incubating. The release is made following the standard
>>> Apache/Maven release process as documented at
>>> http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/apache-release.html. This
>>> is a lazy consensus vote as we already received 3 binding IPMC +1
>>> votes for the PPMC release vote on shiro-dev.
>>>
>>> PPMC release vote thread:
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-shiro-dev/201005.mbox/%3caanlktik_mke9dwlatmxnzq7kwcdbs3amsu5ulymkp...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>>>
>>> The issues solved for 1.0.0 (after the project entered Apache incubator):
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310950&styleName=Html&version=12314078
>>>
>>> The tag to be voted upon:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/shiro/tags/shiro-root-1.0.0-incubating/
>>>
>>> Staging repo for binaries:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-005/
>>>
>>> Staging site:
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/static/1.0.0-incubating/
>>>
>>> Project website (just for informational purposes, not to be voted upon):
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/shiro/
>>>
>>> Guide to testing staged releases:
>>> http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>>>
>>> Lazy consensus, vote open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1
>>>
>>
>> I can't find all the source for the release. AFAICT the only way to
>> recreate all the release artifacts would be from the svn tag but thats
>> not enough as an ASF release must include a source release. If I've
>> just missed it and all the source is there somewhere then could you
>> provide the link?
>
> All the artifacts have sources and javadocs in the same "directories".
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-005/org/apache/shiro/shiro-all/1.0.0-incubating/
>

AIUI all ASF releases MUST have _buildable_ source. The source jars
included in those directories are not buildable. The idea behind this
is that the ASF deals with source code and releases are of source
packages that enable anyone to go tinker with that source, but you
can't do so much useful tinkering if you can't build the source. See
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain
and various emails that fly around on other mailing lists.

I believe the latest Maven release plugin and Apache parent pom.xml
will create the correct packages now. You probably could reconstruct a
buildable source from whats in the Maven repo and if this was a small
release like a single Maven plugin or something it could have been
argued that this was ok and could just be updated to the new Maven
release for next release, but this is something like 20 modules so to
recreate it would be quite a job - working out and recreating the
correct directory structure, unzip all the source jars into the
correct place, download all the pom.xml's and rename them and put them
in the right place etc.

Or anyone leap in here and explain i've misunderstood the policy.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Shiro version 1.0.0-incubating

[ant elder]

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Les Hazlewood  wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:11 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>
>>>> I can't find all the source for the release. AFAICT the only way to
>>>> recreate all the release artifacts would be from the svn tag but thats
>>>> not enough as an ASF release must include a source release. If I've
>>>> just missed it and all the source is there somewhere then could you
>>>> provide the link?
>
> It is part of the staging repo under the provided URL:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-005
>
> Specifically, the complete buildable source package is here:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheshiro-005/org/apache/shiro/shiro-root/1.0.0-incubating/
>
> Les
>

Smashing, ok i change my vote to +1 then.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Nuvem Project

[ant elder]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Luciano Resende  wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Luciano Resende  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would like to propose the Nuvem project for addition to the Apache 
>> incubator.
>>
>> The initial proposal is available at the the Wiki[1], and it is also
>> included below for convenience.
>>
>> We are looking forward to any and all feedback and/or questions on the
>> proposal. We are also looking for a Champion and mentors, and would
>> very much welcome additional volunteers to help steer Nuvem through
>> the incubation process.
>>
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Nuvem
>>
>
> We are still looking for mentors, any volunteers to help ?
>

Hi Luciano, you can add me as a mentor which with Paul will give you
the required three mentors. The proposal doesn't list a champion yet -
isn't that you?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Nuvem Project

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Luciano Resende  wrote:
> After initial discussion [1], please vote on the acceptance of Nuvem
> Project for incubation at the Apache Incubator. The full proposal is
> available at the end of this message and on the wiki at
>
>       http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Nuvem
>
> We ask the Incubator PMC to sponsor the project with Luciano Resende
> as the Champion and Jean-Frederic Clere, Paul Fremantle, Ant Elder and
> Donald Woods volunteering to be mentors.
>
> Please cast your votes:
>
> [ ] +1, bring Nuvem into Incubator
> [ ] +0, I don't care either way
> [ ] -1, do not bring Nuvem into Incubator, because...
>
> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and only votes from the
> Incubator PMC are binding.
>
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/general@incubator.apache.org/msg24841.html
> [2] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Nuvem
>
>
> =
> Apache Nuvem, a cross-cloud application programming interface
> =
>
> Abstract
> ---
>
> Nuvem will define an open application programming interface for common
> cloud application services, allowing applications to be easily ported
> across the most popular cloud platforms.
>
> Proposal
> ---
>
>  * Define an open API that abstracts common cloud platform services to
> help decouple the application logic from the particulars of a specific
> proprietary cloud.
>  * Implement the Nuvem API for popular clouds such as Google
> AppEngine, Amazon EC2 and Microsoft Azure.
>  * Initially focus on User Authentication and Authorization,
> Distributed Cache, Data Store, Queuing; then extend to other services
> such as Chat, Logging, and Debugging.
>
> Background
> 
>
> An important issue for application developers is to avoid lock-in to a
> specific cloud application platform. By providing a cross-cloud
> application programming interface that abstracts common cloud platform
> services, Nuvem addresses this concern and strives to help make
> applications easily portable across multiple clouds.
>
> In mixed cloud deployments, applications need to access platform
> services across cloud boundaries. Nuvem will make this possible by
> providing a remote API for these cloud application platform services.
>
> Rationale
> -
>
> There are currently no efforts to define a truly open-source API to
> abstract common cloud platform services. Nuvem strives to create a
> community around building an open-source cloud application programming
> interface in a manner that fully allows for tried-and-true open source
> mechanisms such as user-driven innovation.
>
> Initial Goals
> 
>
> A Nuvem prototype is currently being developed in an Apache Tuscany
> sandbox, providing initial support for some cloud platform services
> from Google AppEngine and Amazon EC2. We look at moving this prototype
> to the Apache Incubator as the next step to broaden the community,
> expand the API to support more services and cloud platforms.
>
> Current Status
> 
>
> The initial code has been developed under the Apache Software License
> 2.0 by current Apache committers.
>
> Meritocracy
> ---
>
> We recognize the importance of running the project as a meritocracy.
> We are eager to engage other members of the community and operate to
> the standard of meritocracy that Apache emphasizes; we believe this is
> the most effective method of growing our community and enabling
> widespread adoption.
>
> Community
> ---
>
> The initial committer list consists of a couple of independent
> developers. We expect that the project will greatly increase in
> contribution base, and this is one aspect the project will monitor in
> becoming ready for graduation.
>
> Alignment
> --
>
> Currently, there are no other Apache projects concerned with building
> a cross-cloud API for application platform services. We feel that it
> would be a good complement to the set of Apache projects and could
> provide them with an API for interacting with cloud application
> platforms.
>
> Nuvem complements Apache libCloud and Deltacloud projects (which both
> cover provisioning and elasticity in the cloud), providing portability
> of applications and application services   across heterogeneous cloud
> environments.
>
> Orphaned Products
> --
>
> The Nuvem developers have a long-term interest in use and maintenance
> of the code and there is also hope that different cloud providers will
> be interested in providing supp

Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator

[ant elder]

On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.
 wrote:
> On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
>>
>>> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited)
>>> impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the
>>> Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just
>>> wanted to check, thanks guys!
>>
>> The problem is that none of the Chukwa PMC members have been on any
>> Apache PMCs before. My belief is that having training wheels for a bit
>> would be a good thing.
>
> And the podling's committee itself seeks the extra guidance as they become
> a self-managing committee, so the mentors all agreed with this proposal.
> If anything, it makes checking off the graduation matrix much simpler as
> they are already committers, we already have the IP vetting when the code
> came into Hadoop.  We should obviously re-review the grants and trademark
> assignments during incubation.
>

I'm not totally convinced by that reasoning, wouldn't it be simpler to
just go directly to TLP and have those listed here as mentors agree to
help out by being on the initial PMC?

If it does incubate what would be delaying its graduation? Its already
got everything we list in the incubator docs - diverse committers,
done several releases etc.

The current proposal doesn't use the incubator naming for the mailing
lists and svn location, from past discussions here it should really be
using the incubator naming unless its a very special case. Is this a
special case?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator

[ant elder]

On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Bernd Fondermann
 wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 07:54, Eric Yang  wrote:
>> Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify
>> the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC.  One problem, Chukwa community
>> did not have a vote for PMC Chair because we are not sure what is the right
>> process for this.  Meanwhile, I have been writing quarterly report like any
>> other Apache project, only recipient of the report is different.
>>
>> Chukwa releases have been voted by Chukwa community which is similar to
>> Hadoop releases, and managed incremental changes using patches and
>> committers.  Code audit has been performed by the committers to ensure we
>> don't bring in license incompatible libraries into Chukwa.
>>
>> Owen O'Malley had trained us these procedures roughly two years ago, and we
>> have been executing the same process ever since.
>
> This translate for me into:
> Chukwa didn't have proper oversight by a PMC (a committee that is, not
> a single person) at Hadoop.
> Incubation would fix this using established processes.
> I think this is the right track, and the people involved, including
> the Hadoop PMC, ultimatively did the right thing.
> (Except for not simply growing the Hadoop PMC over time to include
> committers from every product.)
>
>> Chukwa has a community of exist user base of 35 people.  It would be nice to
>> make Chukwa a special case to skip incubator nomenclature.  This would ease
>> the migration path for the existing Chukwa community.
>
> Ok with me, at least as far as MLs or SVN are concerned.
> However, Chukwa must be aware that it is changing PMCs from Hadoop to 
> Incubator.
> So different rules might apply, like marking release artifacts as 
> "-incubating".
> Let's gather some more feedback on this.
>

Most projects that come to incubate would likely prefer to go straight
to the TLP naming.

The last time i recall this came up was here:
http://apache.markmail.org/message/ifinvq7wqmeoo5ix

IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa
website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a
TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them
decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-)

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator

[ant elder]

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:21 PM, William A. Rowe Jr.  wrote:
> On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder  wrote:
>>
>>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa
>>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a
>>> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them
>>> decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-)
>>
>> I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a
>> strawman ;-)
>
> Well folks, it's a fun debate and all, but it isn't helping bring this
> vote to a conclusion :)
>
> Is anyone in agreement with ant?  Otherwise we should just move ahead
> and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this
> time.
>
> If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with
> guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource
> naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring
> all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify
> this decision.
>
> At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in
> terms of resource creation and management;

Option 1. sounds most sensible to me too.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator

[ant elder]

On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Chris Douglas  wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Bernd Fondermann
>  wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Fair point.
>
> The naming debate is only about the location of the project in svn and
> the mailing lists, right? Conducting the vote with this variable has
> become more arduous than all the INFRA and site work it implies; let's
> drop it. Eric, could you just change the naming in the proposal to
> match the convention? Unless there are other open issues, a straight,
> up/down vote should be possible with that modification.
>
> Bernd, would you mind conducting the next vote so that it runs to your
> satisfaction?
>
>> IMHO, Either Hadoop decides to run a TLP movement, or the Incubator
>> conducts a proper vote.
>
> The Hadoop PMC vote to recommend Chukwa as a TLP directly did not pass. -C
>

I've been suggesting it would be simpler for Chukwa to go directly to
TLP but if thats not going to happen then you have my support to
incubate if thats what they really want to do, and I agree a new vote
might making things clearer. It seems a shame to require more renaming
of mailing lists etc than necessary, another alternative could be to
just keep the existing naming that Chukwa currently uses during the
incubation and only do renaming when graduating to TLP. That avoids
one renaming and might get more IPMC votes for the proposal than it
did when using the TLP naming.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: VOTE: Release Apache RAT 0.7

[ant elder]

All looks ok to me

+1

   ...ant

On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the RAT developer team would like your approvement for a release of
> Apache RAT 0.7.
>
> The distribution files (binary and source) are here:
>
>    
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherat-051/org/apache/rat/apache-rat/0.7/
>
> The proposed site and the KEYS file are here:
>
>  http://people.apache.org/~jochen/rat/site/
>  http://people.apache.org/~jochen/rat/KEYS
>
> The SVN tag:
>
>  https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rat/main/tags/apache-rat-project-0.7/
>
> The list of resolved issues is here:
>
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&&pid=12310750&status=5&status=6&fixfor=12313890&sorter/field=issuekey&sorter/order=DESC
>
> Please, cast your vote.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] =0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jochen
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[ant elder]

How about keeping it here at the Incubator? It could be a showcase
project that demonstrates how to do things like releases, as well as
an "eat your own dog food" type place to help avoid any unnecessarily
burdensome IPMC processes and procedures ;)

   ...ant

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
 wrote:
> Hi Jochen,
>
> not sure if Commons is the right place sine RAT has a very spezialized scope
> or to state it differently I would not look for RAT in Commons.
>
> What about Maven TLP?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
> On 10.08.10 12:40, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> having just published a release of Apache RAT with the "-incubating"
>> label, I'd though it is time to discuss the future of RAT. RAT is an
>> incubator project since 18 months. It is not an overly busy project:
>> The occasional feature request, which is handled, a bug report from
>> time to time, and so on. OTOH, it definitely lives: People are
>> interested and, what's more, it is very widely adopted by all Java
>> projects I am aware of and perhaps even by a few non-Java projects. If
>> there will ever be a migration to a new license like ASL 3 or a
>> another change of the header policy, then RAT will likely play a very
>> important part in the process. Even now, the RAT report is carefully
>> studied as part of every release vote. (Funnily, RAT is very rarely
>> used to inspect itself, because so far I didn't find a possibility to
>> run a previous version of the RAT Maven plugin as part of a build. In
>> fact, RAT is the only project I am aware of, which doesn't publish a
>> RAT report. :-)
>>
>> IMO, RAT could very well leave the incubator. It's 10 or so committers
>> [1] are all part of an organization called ASF since years, so you
>> might question the diversity, but I don't believe anyone will actually
>> do that. ;-) The source code has been developed under ASL and by
>> Apache committers right from the start, so licensing was never an
>> issue.
>>
>> The question is: What's the target? RAT is way too small for an
>> independent project. And I cannot imagine anybody of the current
>> committers writing board reports. To me, a Rat TLP is no option. So we
>> have the second possibility: Put it under the hat of another TLP. The
>> only one that comes to my mind is the Apache Commons project.
>>
>> But Commons would be an excellent choice: Most, or even all of the RAT
>> committers are Commons committers as well. Commons was one of the
>> drivers for integration of RAT into every release build. I admit that
>> I wouldn't like to change the package name or the Maven group ID
>> again, but either Commons developers could accept that exception from
>> the rule or I'd force myself to do the required changes.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Jochen
>>
>>
>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/rat/team-list.html
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[ant elder]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Stefan Bodewig  wrote:
> On 2010-08-10, ant elder wrote:
>
>> How about keeping it here at the Incubator?
>
> I was going to suggest that as well - as a subproject, not as an eternal
> podling.  But I understand Ross point of sending the wrong signal.
> Infra would be fine with me if infra wanted to absorb rat.
>

A thing with being part of infra is that the rat people are less
likely to be so actively involved with other infra pmc work and
perhaps visa versa, if it was here at the Incubator i'd hope that it
could really be one pmc group with everyone interested in what rat is
doing and how that relates to what Incubator reviews do.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Future of RAT

[ant elder]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:

> However, I'm not sure I get the whole reasoning below RE: TLP? Why not have a 
> RAT TLP? The overhead of filing board reports and not knowing anyone on the 
> team that would be able to? Hen files them all the time (well he used to as 
> Attic VP). And the other names I see on that list [1] below are all people I 
> widely respect at the ASF and folks who pop up on board@, members@ and other 
> foundation-wide lists from time to time. I don't want to speak for anybody, 
> but what would be the issue with any of them filing board reports? Or, 
> yourself for that matter? :) You see to get this whole release process thing 
> - how is the board report sent monthly for the first few months, then 
> quarterly after such a big deal? So, what's the problem with being a TLP?

Yep i agree, there are already other small TLPs so it doesn't need to
be an issue, so going TLP does sound ideal.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: an experiment

[ant elder]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Joe Schaefer  wrote:


> The second idea is more controversial: to hold IPMC votes to
> admit all significant committers to those projects to the IPMC
> itself.  The purpose of this concept is to allow those who
> best know the codebase to provide IPMC oversight over it,
> especially as it pertains to releases.
>

Without some more explanation I'm not that convinced about doing that.
The main purpose of the IPMC is to vote on the graduation of
poddlings, why should some random ASF poddling newbie get a binding
vote on the graduation of _any_ poddling?

I'm guessing the motivation for this proposal is not to give poddling
committers binding votes on other poddling graduations but to give
them binding votes on their own poddling activities, and that i agree
with. The things they need binding votes on is their committer votes,
ppmc votes (they already have that), and release votes - lets just
give them those.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: an experiment

[ant elder]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 11:28 PM, Davanum Srinivas  wrote:
> Ant,
>
> My personal opinion (and i am hoping!) was that such individuals from ppmc's
> who end up in ipmc would help build bridges between podlings and will help
> get lessons learned (when any ppmc has issues/problems/roadblocks) back to
> their ppmc.

Isn't that sort of thing exactly what hasn't happened in past projects
with sub projects and why these days sub projects often get moved out
to be TLPs? If a poddlings active committers warrent being on the IPMC
why not graduate the poddling or give the poddling its own PMC? It
would be good for poddlings to have more control over their own
activities like voting committers and releases and this would give
them that which is good so i guess I wouldn't stand in the way of
trying it, but doing it with this approach does feel like we'd just be
creating another great big umbrella project with all the issues that
has.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Bean Validation 0.2-incubating RC2

[ant elder]

Looks good to me too, i can't see anything at all to comment on.

+1

   ...ant

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Kevan Miller  wrote:
> +1
>
> Signature/checksums, build, source (RAT), and general snooping around with 
> emacs all looked good. Thanks Donald!
>
> --kevan
> On Aug 13, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
>
>> A Bean Validation 0.2-incubating release candidate #2 has been created
>> with the following artifacts up for a vote:
>>
>> SVN source tag (r985290):
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/bval/tags/0.2-incubating/
>>
>> Maven staging repo:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebval-102/
>>
>> Source release:
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebval-102/org/apache/bval/bval-parent/0.2-incubating/bval-parent-0.2-incubating-source-release.zip
>>
>> Javadoc staging site:
>> http://people.apache.org/~dwoods/bval/0.2-incubating/staging-site/apidocs/
>>
>> PGP release keys (signed using D018E6B1):
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/bval/KEYS
>>
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1  approve
>> [ ] +0  no opinion
>> [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Donald
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change name of Lucene Connectors Framework to Apache Connectors Framework

[ant elder]

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Grant Ingersoll  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After much debate both here and on the connectors mailing list, the LCF 
> community has voted (see 
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-connectors-dev/201008.mbox/browser)
>  and would like to officially change our name to be the "Apache Connectors 
> Framework".  We would like the Incubator PMC to vote to make this official.
>
> [] +1 Change the Lucene Connector Framework to the Apache Connector Framework
> [] 0 Don't care
> [] -1 Don't change it
>
> Since this is a procedural vote 
> (http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html), it is a majority rule vote 
> with binding votes coming from IPMC members.  The vote is open for 72 hours.
>
> Here's my +1 (binding).
>
> Thanks,
> Grant

-0

I agree with the comments from David and others such as [1] and the
suggestion at [2] to call it something more abstract like Apache
Connecto.

Thats IMHO anyway, I'm not sure that the IPMC should be the ones with
binding votes on this but it would be good if the poddling could take
into consideration our views.

   ...ant

[1] http://apache.markmail.org/message/ryf4eebpzpsvq3hr
[2] http://apache.markmail.org/message/zyiodmx4hbqfjek3

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Change name of Lucene Connectors Framework to Apache Connectors Framework

[ant elder]

On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Karl Wright  wrote:

> Grant proposed that we simply go from LCF to ACF at that time, and
> posted accordingly to this group.  He received several positive responses,
> and only one that raised any concerns.  After a week's delay, we presumed
> that all was well,

That may be the cause of all this - there was a concern raised but
instead of being taken on board it was ignored.

Looking at the vote result of options [1] Apache Manifold is the
second highest choice and has a good amount of support and is far less
contentious than ACF so why not just go with that?

I agree with Upayavira's comment [2] - while it may not be down to the
IPMC to veto a name the board may well do so. So if you want to reduce
the chance of a book title being messed up when the project goes TLP
then i'd go with something abstract like Apache Manifold now (or else
atleast ping the board now to see if they'll comment).

   ...ant

[1] 
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-connectors-dev/201009.mbox/%3caanlktikd9fglbnyybrha6emr8ordzdlejaf85qvpf...@mail.gmail.com%3e

[2] http://apache.markmail.org/message/vbuq6hqfpuodouyp

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Apache Chemistry OpenCMIS 0.1.0-incubating (RC2)

[ant elder]

I've had a look, and it all looks good. The licensing and legal doc in
the artifacts looks fine, the sigs verify, src builds etc.

+1

   ...ant

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Gabriele Columbro  wrote:
> Dear Incubator PMC members,
> on behalf of the Chemistry dev team, I'd like to ask your approval to
> release the RC2 packages as Chemistry OpenCMIS 0.1.0-incubating.
>
> Legal and packaging issues - that blocked RC1- should have been now resolved
> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CMIS-224), while detailed release
> notes can be found in Jira at:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CMIS/fixforversion/12315133.
>
> The release has passed the Chemistry incubator PMC vote:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-chemistry-dev/201009.mbox/%3cf6d8594e-4913-4af6-aaab-a1b30e951...@apache.org%3e.
> During the vote, also 2 IPMC (Nick Burch & Jukka Zitting) votes have been
> collected, so we'd need one more IPMC +1 to proceed with the release.
>
> Main release candidate packages (for distribution at apache.org/dist) are
> at:
> http://people.apache.org/~gabriele/chemistry/opencmis/0.1.0-incubating-rc2/dist/
> The full set of Maven artifacts (for distribution at repository.apache.org)
> is at:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachechemistry-012/
>
> Sources tag can be found at:
>  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/chemistry/opencmis/tags/chemistry-opencmis-0.1.0-incubating-RC2/
>
> The staging maven documentation site is at :
> http://people.apache.org/~gabriele/chemistry/opencmis/0.1.0-incubating-rc2/site/
> (full integration tests at: http://bit.ly/b07hK8)
>
> Artifacts have been signed using key D0383AE5 (publicly available at
> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xB0E9DD9ED0383AE5 and
> under
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/chemistry/opencmis/trunk/KEYS).
>
> The vote is open for 72 hours.
>
> Please cast your votes!
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
> Thanks in advance!
> Gabriele
>
> --
>
> Gabriele Columbro
> Alfresco Software, Ltd.
>
> http://www.mindthegab.com
> http://twitter.com/mindthegabz
>
> " Keyboard not found. Press F1 to continue. "
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Whirr version 0.1.0-incubating

[ant elder]

Looks ok, +1.

The binary jar whirr-cli-0.1.0-incubating.jar is missing the incubator
DISCLAIMER file but that file is in the other artifacts like the src
distro so i guess its enough to just fix that next time. Its also a
bit hard to work out if all the licenses are included for all the
stuff thats included in that jar as theres so much in it, it did have
a few i check but it would be helpful to have something like the main
LICENSE file or a README summarise whats there and the licensing.

   ...ant


On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Tom White  wrote:
> This is the first incubator release for Apache Whirr, version
> 0.1.0-incubating. We already received one binding IPMC +1 vote for the
> PPMC release vote on whirr-dev, so are looking for two more.
>
> PPMC release vote thread:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-whirr-dev/201009.mbox/%3caanlktinio1np6d+gbnm4w6jjcg-6koe7x8begkuxr...@mail.gmail.com%3e
>
> The issues fixed for 0.1.0-incubating
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12315111&styleName=Html&projectId=1230
>
> Source and binary files:
> http://people.apache.org/~tomwhite/whirr-releases/
>
> Maven staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachewhirr-009
>
> The tag to be voted upon:
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/whirr/tags/release-0.1.0-incubating
>
> The vote is open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Apache SIS 0.1-incubating Release Candidate #1

[ant elder]

It looks pretty good to me too, so good job for a first release.

The only issue i found is that the Incubator disclaimer text is
missing, that should either be in the README or a separate DISCLAIMER
file, see http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html#disclaimers

A lot of poddlings seem to miss this recently but been permitted to
just fix it for the next release so I guess that should be ok, so +1
from me unless some other IPMCer complains about it.

   ...ant

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I have posted a candidate for the Apache SIS 0.1-incubating release. The
> source code is at:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/apache-sis-0.1-incubating/rc1/
>
> See the included CHANGES.txt file for details on release contents and latest
> changes. The release was made using the Maven2 release plugin, according to
> Jukka Zitting's notes from Tika-ville:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yz2cqls
>
> Caveat: we aren't publishing to Maven Central yet. I've filed INFRA-3177 [1]
> to make this happen for our next release.
>
> See the included README.txt file for an example of how to use Apache SIS in
> a Tomcat environment and how to run the demo.
>
> This plugin creates a Apache SIS 0.1-incubating tag at:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sis/tags/0.1-incubating/
>
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache SIS 0.1-incubating. The
> vote is open for the next 72 hours. Only votes from Incubator PMC are
> binding, but everyone is welcome to check the release candidate and voice
> their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at least three binding +1
> votes are cast.
>
> [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache SIS 0.1-incubating.
>
> [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> P.S. Here's my +1.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3177
>
> ++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: chris.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Apache SIS 0.1-incubating Release Candidate #2

[ant elder]

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I have posted a 2nd candidate for the Apache SIS 0.1-incubating release. The
> source code is at:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/apache-sis-0.1-incubating/rc2/
>
> This release addresses the following comments from IPMC members during the
> RC #1 VOTE:
>
> - add Incubator disclaimer per comments from Ant Elder.
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html#disclaimers
>
> - add JDOM license to NOTICE.txt and upgrade to apache parent 7 per comments
> from Mark Struberg.
>
> - note that ROME and Georss-ROME are under the ASLv2 per Kevan Miller's
> comments.
>
> See the included CHANGES.txt file for details on release contents and latest
> changes. The release was made using the Maven2 release plugin, according to
> Jukka Zitting's notes from Tika-ville:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yz2cqls
>
> Caveat: we aren't publishing to Maven Central yet. I've filed INFRA-3177 [1]
> to make this happen for our next release.
>
> See the included README.txt file for an example of how to use Apache SIS in
> a Tomcat environment and how to run the demo.
>
> This plugin creates a Apache SIS 0.1-incubating tag at:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sis/tags/0.1-incubating/
>
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache SIS 0.1-incubating. The
> vote is open for the next 72 hours. Only votes from Incubator PMC are
> binding, but everyone is welcome to check the release candidate and voice
> their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at least three binding +1
> votes are cast.
>
> [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache SIS 0.1-incubating.
>
> [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> P.S. Here's my +1.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3177
>

I think this release src distribution has too much unnecessary stuff
in its LICENSE and NOTICE files.

Unfortunately you've hit one of those potentially painful parts of
doing a release on general@ - the contents of the LICENSE and NOTICE
file - and most likely everyone you ask will tell you a slightly
different thing of what it should be like. Here's what I say:

1) Each artifact being released needs to include the licenses for
everything in the artifact (Thats often all in the single LICENSE file
but its also ok to have just the Apache License in the LICENSE file
and any other license somewhere obvious).

2) The NOTICE file has some standard text (see
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
) and then maybe some mention of other things. More often than not the
mention of other things is unnecessary.

This release is a source only release and AFAICT there is nothing
included in apache-sis-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz that is licensed with
anything other than the Apache license so the LICENSE text needs to
have just the Apache License text. Similarly the NOTICE file doesn't
need to include anything other than the standard NOTICE text.

If this release was including a binary release artifact then the
LICENSE file of that binary release would need to include the licenses
of any included dependencies, eg i think thats what this src release
LICENSE now has.

If this release was including a binary release artifact then the
NOTICE file should still (IMHO) just include the standard NOTICE text.
All that other stuff that you've now added to the NOTICE shouldn't be
there as none of it is "required third-party notices".

You could argue that it doesn't really matter that there is some extra
stuff in the LICENSE and NOTICE and maybe thats true but as this is
the first Apache release its probably worth having the debate.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Apache SIS 0.1-incubating Release Candidate #2

[ant elder]

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:54 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Ant,
>
> Thanks. Do you see any of the below as a blocker to the first release? What
> extra stuff, specifically, do you see that wasn’t present in the prior where
> that you +1’ed and thought was OK as a first release?
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>

In NOTICE file 
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sis/tags/0.1-incubating/NOTICE.txt
everything after the line "The Apache Software Foundation
(http://www.apache.org/)." shouldn't be there.

In the LICENSE file
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sis/tags/0.1-incubating/LICENSE.txt
everything including and after the line "APACHE TIKA SUBCOMPONENTS"
shouldn't be there (should it? what is using those extra licenses?).

I'd not noticed the extra stuff in the LICENSE file in RC1 but its the
RC2 NOTICE file that i think is the blocker - license text does not
belong in the NOTICE file.

  ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Apache SIS 0.1-incubating Release Candidate #3

[ant elder]

Looks good to me, +1.

   ...ant

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 3:47 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I have posted a 3rd candidate for the Apache SIS 0.1-incubating release. The
> source code is at:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~mattmann/apache-sis-0.1-incubating/rc3/
>
> This release addresses the following comments from IPMC members during the
> RC #2 VOTE:
>
> From Ant Elder:
>
> In NOTICE file
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sis/tags/0.1-incubating/NOTICE.txt
> everything after the line "The Apache Software Foundation
> (http://www.apache.org/)." shouldn't be there.
>
> In the LICENSE file
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sis/tags/0.1-incubating/LICENSE.tx
> t everything including and after the line "APACHE TIKA SUBCOMPONENTS"
> shouldn't be there (should it? what is using those extra licenses?).
>
>
> See the included CHANGES.txt file for details on release contents and latest
> changes. The release was made using the Maven2 release plugin, according to
> Jukka Zitting's notes from Tika-ville:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yz2cqls
>
> Caveat: we aren't publishing to Maven Central yet. I've filed INFRA-3177 [1]
> to make this happen for our next release.
>
> See the included README.txt file for an example of how to use Apache SIS in
> a Tomcat environment and how to run the demo.
>
> This plugin creates a Apache SIS 0.1-incubating tag at:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/sis/tags/0.1-incubating/
>
> Please vote on releasing these packages as Apache SIS 0.1-incubating. The
> vote is open for the next 72 hours. Only votes from Incubator PMC are
> binding, but everyone is welcome to check the release candidate and voice
> their approval or disapproval. The vote passes if at least three binding +1
> votes are cast.
>
> [ ] +1 Release the packages as Apache SIS 0.1-incubating.
>
> [ ] -1 Do not release the packages because...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> P.S. Here's my +1.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3177
>
> ++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: chris.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++
>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

[DISCUSS] Poddling new committer process

[ant elder]

I'd like to propose that the process for Incubator poddlings to make
someone a new committer is simplified so that all that is needed are
votes from poddling committers and that there is no longer any need
for votes from Incubator PMC members or a separate Incubator PMC vote.

As justification, this is the process that was in place some years ago
and it worked fine like that, there is the "experiment" currently in
place with some poddlings doing this which seems to be working ok, and
the board has said they're ok with it.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Accept Jena into the incubator

[ant elder]

+1

   ...ant

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Ross Gardler  wrote:
> Please vote on the acceptance of JENA into the incubator. The proposal can
> be found at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/JenaProposal and is copied
> below.
>
> [ ] +1 Accept Jena for incubation
> [ ] +0 Don't care
> [ ] -1 Reject for the following reason:
>
> The vote is open for at least 72 hours.
>
> Thanks,
> Ross
>
> = Jena, a Semantic Web Framework =
> == Abstract ==
> Jena is a semantic web framework for Java, based on W3C standards.
>
> == Proposal ==
> Jena provides a semantic web framework in Java that implements the key W3C
> recommendations for the core semantic web technologies of RDF and SPARQL.
>  Jena is a number of components and modules built on this core system.  It
> currently includes:
>
>  * an API for working with RDF
>  * Parsers and writers for the RDF formats (RDF/XML, Turtle, N-triples,
> NQuads, TriG)
>  * an implementation of SPARQL, the W3C standard RDF query language
>  * multiple storage systems for RDF data including in-memory, file-backed,
> in SQL databases and in custom scalable storage systems
>  * an API for manipulation of OWL
>  * a rule-based inference engine
>  * an implementation of GRDDL for extraction of RDF from XML formats
>  * a standards compliant IRI library.
>
> The project includes facilities based around this core to encourage the
>  creation of components and contributions both as part of Jena and also  as
> companion open source activities.
>
> This proposal includes the main components of Jena: the main Jena download,
> ARQ, GRDDL, SDB, TDB, the IRI  library and Joseki.  Other components may be
> contributed later - we're  just starting with the main part of Jena for now.
>
> == Background ==
> The W3C recommendations provide detailed specifications and it is important
> to follow these standards so that independently built applications can
> exchange data over the web.  Jena provides high quality  Java
> implementations of RDF input/output and storage so that application  writers
> can concentrate on the application, not the low-level details.
>
> W3C Semantic Web: http://www.w3.org/standards/semanticweb/
>
> Jena has been on !SourceForge since 2001.
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/jena/
>
> == Rationale ==
> The open source project was originally created as part of a research
> activity in HPLabs.  In building new systems, the researchers identified
>  the value of a common platform that dealt with the low level details of
>  the standards.  This lead to engagement with the standards process and  the
> creation of a framework that provided a library to deal with the  details of
> semantic web standards.  This work was released as Jena. The  developers
> have contributed implementation experience back to the working groups.
>
> None of the contributors now work for HP.  Providing a uniform contributor
> and licensing framework assists commercial use of Jena.
>
> == Current Status ==
> Jena is already an established project with a large user base in industry
> and academia.  It currently uses a BSD-style three-clause license with a
> number of contributing copyright holders. Support is primarily provided via
> the jena-...@groups.yahoo.com mailing list. The majority of the team was
> employed in HPLabs, and HP holds the majority of the copyright over the code
> - there are contributions from non-HP companies.  HP decided to close the
> research group as of October 2009 and the people from HPLabs connected with
> the project have moved on to several different semantic web companies.
>
> This change does not immediately affect Jena because the people who were  in
> HP still remain active contributors to Jena.  The project continues to be
> supported and actively enhanced.  There is now the  opportunity to become an
> open source project without a single large  organisation involved.
>
> === Meritocracy ===
> The Jena team has always been self-determining; there has not been a project
> manager in charge of the effort.  Instead, it has grown through  individuals
> contributing to the codebase as part of their research activities.  The team
> has organised itself to create the framework for builds, releases and public
> support, and people who had worked on Jena in HP, and moved to other
> companies and institutions, have continued to  contribute.
>
> === Core developers ===
> Jena originated within a research activity in HPLabs, starting around 2000.
> Contributors to jena have been active in W3C working groups including
> chairing the "RDF Core" working group and acting as document editors on
> several other working groups.  W3C processes are public; jena contributors
> have been involved in public debate and decision making. People have since
> moved on from HP to several semantic web forced companies and to university
> positions.
>
> === Alignment ===
> Jena is already in use in many commercial systems as well as widely used  in
> academic research and teaching.  We want to con

Re: [DISCUSS] Poddling new committer process

[ant elder]

On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Craig L Russell
 wrote:
> Assuming that no one comes forward with a significant reason to disallow
> this, I'd just request that you not call a VOTE until you have an update to
> the incubator page that describes the process.
>
> In other words, let's DISCUSS and then VOTE on the change to the process
> page.
>

I don't think a VOTE is necessary because the page being updated is
not a policy page so changes use CTR not RTC.
For an enjoyable sense of symmetry see:
http://apache.markmail.org/message/h7lvpedsn46g72lf

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Poddling new committer process

[ant elder]

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 8:20 AM, ant elder  wrote:
> I'd like to propose that the process for Incubator poddlings to make
> someone a new committer is simplified so that all that is needed are
> votes from poddling committers and that there is no longer any need
> for votes from Incubator PMC members or a separate Incubator PMC vote.
>
> As justification, this is the process that was in place some years ago
> and it worked fine like that, there is the "experiment" currently in
> place with some poddlings doing this which seems to be working ok, and
> the board has said they're ok with it.
>
>   ...ant
>

Ok its been nearly a week and there is overwhelming support for doing
this so I have gone ahead and made an update to the PPMC guide to
reflect this. The text is a copy of what is already there for voting
in a new PPMC member updated as necessary for being a committer. The
new text reads:

--
Any member of the PPMC can propose a new committer. The proposal
should be discussed in private on the PPMC private alias, with a
subject line of [DISCUSS] Joe Bob as committer. If there is consensus
that the proposed member is suitable, then there should be a formal
vote in the PPMC private alias, with the subject line of [VOTE] Joe
Bob as committer. The [VOTE] message should be forwarded to the IPMC (
priv...@incubator.apache.org) to notify them that the vote is
underway. If the vote is successful, the proposer should send a
message to the PPMC private alias, with the subject line of
[VOTE][RESULT] Joe Bob as committer.

Note that to be successful the vote requires at least one +1 from a
poddling mentor, or, if no mentors are available from an Incubator PMC
member.
--

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Accept Wave for incubation

[ant elder]

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 5:26 AM, Greg Stein  wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 22:45, Ralph Goers  wrote:
>> On Nov 23, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 20:47, Ralph Goers  
>>> wrote:
 ...
 OK - Have they explicitly OK'd Apache Wave?  While Apache Wave would 
 certainly be unique to Apache, if Google intends to keep using Google Wave 
 (and Wave as a shorthand) this would get very confusing.
>>>
>>> Don't you think that by proposing Wave to the Incubator that Google
>>> has OK'd this?
>>
>> I don't work for Google and don't know the people proposing this so no, I 
>> have no idea whether Google has OK'd this.
>
> Simple review: the original email was sent by Dan Peterson from his
> google.com address. I imagine that if Google had a problem with it,
> then he wouldn't be working there tomorrow :-D ... or if this was some
> kind of spurious one-guy-goes-batshit-crazy, then how could he line up
> so many people?
>
> And sure, while you couldn't know this, Dan is a great guy. I worked
> with him while at Google. This proposal is straight-up.
>
> My simple point is: please accept proposals at face value rather than
> pushing back with paranoid thoughts about malfeasance on the part of
> the people wanting to join our efforts here at the ASF.
>

Ralph's question seemed reasonable to me, the ASF trademarks people
are a often mentioning problems with using trademarked names like
this. However its something that can be sorted out with those ASF
trademarks folks during incubation, its not a barrier for entry to
incubation.

Anyway, seems like a fine proposal to me, +1 for it coming to Apache.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release for Bigtop version 0.2.0-incubating RC2

[ant elder]

+1

  ...ant

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:14 AM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
> I would like to gently remind all of the IPMC members that
> it's been more than a week by now since our initial request
> for a vote. We've got 2 +1s from IPMC and 6 +1s from the
> community and we would really be grateful if somebody from
> the IPMC who hasn't voted yet would take a look at our
> artifacts.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman (wearing his RM hat).
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Roman Shaposhnik 
> Date: Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 2:00 PM
> Subject: [VOTE] Release for Bigtop version 0.2.0-incubating RC2
> To: bigtop-...@incubator.apache.org, Patrick Hunt 
> Cc: general@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> This takes care of Patrick's RAT concerns. From now on you can run RAT by:
>  $ mvn -Prelease install
> at the top level of a project. This is THE only change between RC1 and RC2
> and given how cosmetic it is I'd like to think that all the existing
> +1 votes don't
> need to be recast. Please let me know if that's not the case.
>
> =
> This is the second incubator release for Apache Bigtop, version
> 0.2.0-incubating.
>
> It fixes the following issues:
>  https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12317591&projectId=12311420
>
> *** Please download, test, and vote by Saturday, November 5
>
> Note that we are voting on the source (tag): release-0.2.0-incubating-RC2
>
> Source tarball, checksums, signature:
>    http://people.apache.org/~rvs/bigtop-0.2.0-incubating-RC2/
>
> The tag to be voted on:
>   
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/bigtop/tags/release-0.2.0-incubating-RC2/
>
> Bigtop's KEYS file, containing the PGP keys used to sign the release:
>   http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/bigtop/dist/KEYS
>
> Note that the Incubator PMC needs to vote on the release after a successful
> PPMC vote before any release can be made official.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

To try that I just went to the ACE downloads page which has a bunch of
jars and source jars to download, i downloaded the source of the first
one, org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator-sources.jar, and
looking inside there is the source to some Java classes but no build
scripts or pom.xml file, so how would I go about building this?

   ...ant

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
> Again, we had this discussion before namely, when the actual release
> vote happened. I'm still confused why we have to go through this
> again. You should be able to build all of the components by using the
> -source.jar's that are provided. They contain what is necessary i.e.,
> the full source.
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:30 PM, sebb  wrote:
>> On 17 November 2011 12:29, Karl Pauls  wrote:
>>> I'm not sure what this has to do with the graduation vote. The release
>>> as such has been accepted by the incubator pmc and there only need to
>>> be one release. The source for each artifact is there, it is just per
>>> artifact in the -source.jar.
>>
>> AFAICT the full source (as in SVN trunk) is not actually present in
>> the distribution directory.
>>
>> For example, where are the top-level files in SVN (BUILDING, README) ?
>> And the etc/ directory?
>>
>> If I wanted to build any or all of the components, there does not
>> appear to be a way to do this from the files in the distribution.
>>
>>> There might be different set-up then a lot of other projects have it
>>> but we release our stuff on a per artifact basis how it is done by for
>>> example Apache Felix as well and never has been an issue (and didn't
>>> become unmanageably either -  also ymmv).
>>
>> The ASF primarily releases source; releases must include full source.
>>
>>> I agree about the KEYS file. We should have uploaded it to the dist
>>> dir as well but at least we have it at some place so it should be easy
>>> to fix.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:07 PM, sebb  wrote:
 On 17 November 2011 10:42, Marcel Offermans  
 wrote:
> In my opinion, ACE is ready to begin the process of graduating from the 
> Apache Incubator to a Top Level Project.
>
> Since joining the incubator in in May 2009 we've added 4 new committers 
> (12 in total now) from diverse organizations and did a release in May 
> this year to demonstrate we follow the Apache guidelines. We've shown an 
> ability to self-govern using accepted Apache practices and ACE continues 
> to attract new contributors and users.
>
> The first step is to vote as a community, demonstrating that ACE is ready 
> and willing to graduate. Once this vote is succesful we create a board 
> resolution proposal or Charter and start a vote on the general incubator 
> list. The full process is described at 
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
>
> The vote is open for at least 72 hours.

 The last (and only) release was 0.8, as far as I can tell.

 There is no KEYS file in http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ace/,
 and there does not appear to be a full source archive of the project
 anywhere.
 The download page does not have a link to any source archives as far
 as I can tell.
 It does link to KEYS in SVN, but almost all other ASF projects have a
 copy of KEYS in the appropriate /dist directory.

 Normally releases are divided into binaries/ and source/ directories,
 with a KEYS file in the top-level, i.e.

 /dist/incubator/ace
 - KEYS
 - binaries/ace zip
 - sources/acezip

 Most of the files in the /dist/incubator/ace directory appear to be
 Maven artifacts; normally these are not stored in /dist but only in
 the Maven repo.
 Indeed most of the files are also in Maven Central. The only non-Maven
 files appear to be

 org.apache.ace.target.devgateway-0.8.0-incubator-distribution.zip
 org.apache.ace.target.devserver-0.8.0-incubator-distribution.zip

 neither of which contains the source.

 I would expect the above zips to be in

 /dist/incubator/ace/binaries

 with corresponding source files in

 /dist/incubator/ace/source

 The SVN layout [1] is also a bit unusual.
 There is no tags/ directory for release tags, although there is a
 releases/ directory containing individual entries for each release for
 each component.
 This is likely to become unmanageable very quickly, if every release
 adds another 63 directory entries under releases/

 [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ace/

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org


>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Karl Pauls
>>> karlpa.

Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
> Again, I'm not against doing things differently for future release
> (and the reason this release looks like it does is because that is
> configured like this in the apache-parent iirc). However, I'm still
> confused what all of this has to do with the graduation proposal vote
> and why this has to be on general@.
>

I think why its come up here now is because part of judging if a
poddling is ready to graduate is if they understand how to make and
review ASF releases properly. And with whats be said here and how the
source has to be built i'm wondering if anyone who voted +1 for the
release would have actually tried to build any of the source.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:38 PM, ant elder  wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
>>> Again, I'm not against doing things differently for future release
>>> (and the reason this release looks like it does is because that is
>>> configured like this in the apache-parent iirc). However, I'm still
>>> confused what all of this has to do with the graduation proposal vote
>>> and why this has to be on general@.
>>>
>>
>> I think why its come up here now is because part of judging if a
>> poddling is ready to graduate is if they understand how to make and
>> review ASF releases properly. And with whats be said here and how the
>> source has to be built i'm wondering if anyone who voted +1 for the
>> release would have actually tried to build any of the source.
>
> I guess the point is: are you arguing that the release should not
> haven been accepted by the incubator in the first place on the grounds
> that you find it hard to build and hence, you want to see a new one
> before the we can vote on approaching the incubator for a graduation?
>

I'm not arguing anything yet. Some valid comments and questions were
made in the vote thread, you asked why they were happening here and i
tried to answer that. The Incubator people should have an opportunity
to discuss a graduation, perhaps some of that might be better on a
graduation discussion thread but there wasn't one of those before the
vote.

The release does look a bit dubious to me.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Accumulo 1.3.5-incubating

[ant elder]

I thought even Maven plugins were supposed to now, isn't that what the
changes a little while back to the standard apache profile for the
release plugin to create source zips was for?

   ...ant

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Benson Margulies
 wrote:
> Sebb,
>
> I think we need a discussion on general@ about source.
>
> I personally serve as release manager for about 3 Apache Maven plugins
> per month.
>
> None of them have a 'source release' in the sense you describe.
> There's a maven source jar artifact, and that's it.
>
> I'm happy to work with the Accumulo folks to add a full source package
> (I think tooling can be borrowed from Apache CXF), but the
> inconsistency here disturbs me.
>
> --benson
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 7:12 AM, sebb  wrote:
>> On 17 November 2011 21:16, Billie J Rinaldi  
>> wrote:
>>> Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Accumulo 
>>> (incubating) version 1.3.5.  This will be the first incubator release for 
>>> Accumulo.
>>>
>>> This candidate has received 4 binding +1 votes (1 IPMC, 3 PPMC) and 1 
>>> non-binding +1 vote, with no -1 votes.  We need 2 additional IPMC votes for 
>>> release.
>>>
>>> The PPMC vote result can be found here:
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-accumulo-dev/20.mbox/%3c1465679136.27503.1321560055469.javamail.r...@linzimmb04o.imo.intelink.gov%3e
>>>
>>> The Accumulo release process is described here:
>>>  http://incubator.apache.org/accumulo/governance/releasing.html
>>>
>>> Tarball, checksums, signatures:
>>>  http://people.apache.org/~ecn/accumulo-1.3.5rc6/
>>
>> -1
>> There's no source release.
>> Yes, the source is included with the binary, but ASF primary goal is
>> to release source; binaries are optional and extra.
>>
>> Also, one or two Java files which don't have AL headers (and don't
>> appear to be autogenerated).
>>
>> BTW, most projects release both .zip and .tar.gz, but that is not a 
>> requirement.
>>
>>> SVN tag:
>>>  https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/accumulo/tags/1.3.5rc6/
>>
>> Minor issue:
>> NOTICE file says "... its licensed under ..." is ungrammatical; should
>> be "... it's licensed under ..."
>> But better would be "... which is licensed under ..."
>>
>> Lots of problems with missing/incorrect SVN properties; I'll raise a
>> JIRA for those.
>>
>>> Keys:
>>>  http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/accumulo/KEYS
>>>
>>> The vote will be held open for the next 72 hours.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Billie
>>>
>>> -
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

That seems an unusual approach to building the src. It also means that
to build the complete 0.8.0 release which contains 60 something
modules would require manually typing in over 400 commands which is
not very practical, i doubt anyone who voted +1 for the release
actually did that. I think an ASF release like this should have also
had a single source distribution that contained all the source for all
those modules along with a build script to build them, and IMHO your
mentors should have helped you do that. Would you consider doing
another release like this before you graduate?

  ...ant

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
> $ mkdir org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator
> $ cd org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator/
> $ wget 
> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ace/org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator-source.jar
> $ jar -xf org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator-sources.jar
> $ wget 
> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ace/org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator.pom
> $ mv org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator.pom pom.xml
> $ mvn clean install
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:54 PM, ant elder  wrote:
>> To try that I just went to the ACE downloads page which has a bunch of
>> jars and source jars to download, i downloaded the source of the first
>> one, org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator-sources.jar, and
>> looking inside there is the source to some Java classes but no build
>> scripts or pom.xml file, so how would I go about building this?
>>
>>   ...ant
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
>>> Again, we had this discussion before namely, when the actual release
>>> vote happened. I'm still confused why we have to go through this
>>> again. You should be able to build all of the components by using the
>>> -source.jar's that are provided. They contain what is necessary i.e.,
>>> the full source.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:30 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>>> On 17 November 2011 12:29, Karl Pauls  wrote:
>>>>> I'm not sure what this has to do with the graduation vote. The release
>>>>> as such has been accepted by the incubator pmc and there only need to
>>>>> be one release. The source for each artifact is there, it is just per
>>>>> artifact in the -source.jar.
>>>>
>>>> AFAICT the full source (as in SVN trunk) is not actually present in
>>>> the distribution directory.
>>>>
>>>> For example, where are the top-level files in SVN (BUILDING, README) ?
>>>> And the etc/ directory?
>>>>
>>>> If I wanted to build any or all of the components, there does not
>>>> appear to be a way to do this from the files in the distribution.
>>>>
>>>>> There might be different set-up then a lot of other projects have it
>>>>> but we release our stuff on a per artifact basis how it is done by for
>>>>> example Apache Felix as well and never has been an issue (and didn't
>>>>> become unmanageably either -  also ymmv).
>>>>
>>>> The ASF primarily releases source; releases must include full source.
>>>>
>>>>> I agree about the KEYS file. We should have uploaded it to the dist
>>>>> dir as well but at least we have it at some place so it should be easy
>>>>> to fix.
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:07 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>>>>> On 17 November 2011 10:42, Marcel Offermans 
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>> In my opinion, ACE is ready to begin the process of graduating from the 
>>>>>>> Apache Incubator to a Top Level Project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since joining the incubator in in May 2009 we've added 4 new committers 
>>>>>>> (12 in total now) from diverse organizations and did a release in May 
>>>>>>> this year to demonstrate we follow the Apache guidelines. We've shown 
>>>>>>> an ability to self-govern using accepted Apache practices and ACE 
>>>>>>> continues to attract new contributors and users.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The first step is to vote as a community, demonstrating that ACE is 
>>>>>>> ready and willing to graduate. Once this vo

Re: Actively retiring projects (was: Incubator Board Report November 2011)

[ant elder]

On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
 wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Henri Yandell  wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Sam Ruby  wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Noel J. Bergman  wrote:

 We are, however, recognizing that we've had growth issues of our own.  As
 David Crossley pointed out, he made mistakes last month related to the
 Reporting Schedule, and we continue to have issues.  The Incubator is 
 almost
 as big as the rest of the ASF combined.  David posted a plot chart
 reflecting our growth: http://incubator.apache.org/history/
>>>
>>> Excellent plot chart.  As with most plot charts, the end result is a
>>> Rorschach test.  I'll tell you what I (personally) see in this chart:
>>> a failure to perform garbage collection.  My personal perspective is
>>> that incubation shouldn't generally take more than a year.  That
>>> doesn't mean that there won't be exceptions, and in a few rare cases,
>>> some that go well beyond that arbitrary time limit, but the point is
>>> that those should be the exception rather than the rule.
>
> Sometimes when you turn up the heat and reduce the cooking time, the
> pies end up being half baked...
>

I agree with that and also with Benson's comments about size and
growth often being one of the barriers to graduation. A number of the
long term poddlings don't have a very diverse or even three active
committers, if theres a threat of expulsion because of that they'll
probably just start making any old person a committer just to make up
the numbers.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: should podlings have informal chairs?

[ant elder]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Ross Gardler
 wrote:
> On 21 November 2011 08:42, Robert Burrell Donkin
>  wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Brett Porter  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Some time back we moved to having 3 mentors, which had the positive of more 
>>> hands and enough binding votes, but the downside of no single person "on 
>>> the hook" for a podling's reporting and progress towards graduation.
>>>
>>> Should we appoint one of the mentors at the start to be the "chair" of the 
>>> PPMC, in the same way as a full project? I would see them as responsible 
>>> for ensuring the podling is reporting, and that all of the mentors are 
>>> engaged and signing off the reports.
>>>
>>> As the podling matures, this role could be transitioned to the person who 
>>> will be nominated as the chair of the project after it graduates, if they 
>>> are ready for that.
>>>
>>> What do others think?
>>
>> I think appointing a chair in the early stages is likely to work
>> against building a community of peers.
>
> I agree, especially if that "chair" is also a mentor. Mentors are not
> supposed to *do* only to *guide*.
>
> On the other hand, I do think the original point of none of the three
> mentors being responsible is a problem.
>
>> I think that establishing a chair once community has self-organised
>> would be a good idea.
>
> Not before graduation. I have seen, in a number of podlings, that the
> obvious choice of a chair half way through graduation (for example) is
> often not the same choice at the end of graduation.
>

As an alternative then what about making the poddling champion a more
active role? Presently most champions are usually just a name on the
initial proposal who do little during incubation, we could change that
and for example require the champion to also contribute a line or two
to the poddling report about how its going and what they'd like to see
happening to progress graduation.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

Well IMHO i don't think this release demonstrates that the poddling
has an understanding of making or reviewing ASF releases and thats the
point of requiring releases during incubation.

The comment from Guillaume in this thread was just about naming the
SVN folder containing the tags "releases" instead of "tags" which no
one is saying is a major issue.

   ...ant

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
> Well, I agree and disagree at the same time :-).
>
> On the one hand (as pointed out by Guillaume Nodet), we should have
> generated the source distribution for each bundle. We switched to a
> newer parent pom and did miss that we should have configured that.
> This makes it not very practical to build the release and we for sure
> will configure it next time.
>
> On the other hand, we don't want to provide a single source
> distribution for all bundles as we still want to release our bundles
> independently from each other.
>
> In summary, the next release will contain easier to build source
> distributions for each bundle but not a single source distribution for
> all of them. That is a good catch overall but I don't think it makes
> this release invalid (as the required things are there - just
> unfortunately not very practical to build).  As we are planning to
> roll a 1.0.0 release anyways when graduated, I'd say lets ask for
> graduation and then provide a 1.0.0 release which has the source
> distribution configured per bundle. How about that?
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 2:56 AM, ant elder  wrote:
>> That seems an unusual approach to building the src. It also means that
>> to build the complete 0.8.0 release which contains 60 something
>> modules would require manually typing in over 400 commands which is
>> not very practical, i doubt anyone who voted +1 for the release
>> actually did that. I think an ASF release like this should have also
>> had a single source distribution that contained all the source for all
>> those modules along with a build script to build them, and IMHO your
>> mentors should have helped you do that. Would you consider doing
>> another release like this before you graduate?
>>
>>  ...ant
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
>>> $ mkdir org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator
>>> $ cd org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator/
>>> $ wget 
>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ace/org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator-source.jar
>>> $ jar -xf org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator-sources.jar
>>> $ wget 
>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/ace/org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator.pom
>>> $ mv org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator.pom pom.xml
>>> $ mvn clean install
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:54 PM, ant elder  wrote:
>>>> To try that I just went to the ACE downloads page which has a bunch of
>>>> jars and source jars to download, i downloaded the source of the first
>>>> one, org.apache.ace.client.automation-0.8.0-incubator-sources.jar, and
>>>> looking inside there is the source to some Java classes but no build
>>>> scripts or pom.xml file, so how would I go about building this?
>>>>
>>>>   ...ant
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
>>>>> Again, we had this discussion before namely, when the actual release
>>>>> vote happened. I'm still confused why we have to go through this
>>>>> again. You should be able to build all of the components by using the
>>>>> -source.jar's that are provided. They contain what is necessary i.e.,
>>>>> the full source.
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:30 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>>>>> On 17 November 2011 12:29, Karl Pauls  wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm not sure what this has to do with the graduation vote. The release
>>>>>>> as such has been accepted by the incubator pmc and there only need to
>>>>>>> be one release. The source for each artifact is there, it is just per
>>>>>>> artifact in the -source.jar.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AFAICT the full source (as in SVN trunk) is not actually present in
>>>>>> the distribution directory.
>>>>>>
>>>>

Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:08 PM, ant elder  wrote:
>> Well IMHO i don't think this release demonstrates that the poddling
>> has an understanding of making or reviewing ASF releases and thats the
>> point of requiring releases during incubation.
>
> So you want us to do a new release? Fine, whatever, we can just roll a
> new release which has the source distribution configured. That was a
> mistake in the first place as it makes the bundles not easily
> individually buildable.
>
> However, we still will not have a combined source release as we want
> to be able to release our bundles individually. Is that the resolution
> then? All we have to do is a do a micro release with the source
> distribution configured on a per artifact level?
>

I agree the requirement for a single source release doesn't seem
totally clear, I've said I think you should have one and so has sebb,
it would be good to hear what other Incubator PMC people think. I
think you need one for two main reasons:

1) The ASF deals with source and the releases are how users get hold
of that source. If a user is going to do development with the released
ACE source they likely aren't going to be able to do very much useful
with just single things like org.apache.ace.repository.imp. At the
very least they're probably going to want
org.apache.ace.repository.api too but likely there is a big network of
the 60 something ACE modules that anyone doing most non-trivial ACE
development is going to want. One source distribution makes this easy,
making them have to download them all separately isn't particularly
practical. That https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ace/trunk/
is structured so the ASF committers can work with them as one single
buildable checkout i think shows thats true.

2) If there is only individually buildable source for each jar how are
people really going to verify that the release is actually buildable
and the artifacts match the SVN tag source when reviewing and voting
on release votes? No one reviewing is really likely to download 60
separate distros and build them all one by one are they?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Richard S. Hall  wrote:
> On 11/21/11 09:41 , ant elder wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Karl Pauls  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 3:08 PM, ant elder  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well IMHO i don't think this release demonstrates that the poddling
>>>> has an understanding of making or reviewing ASF releases and thats the
>>>> point of requiring releases during incubation.
>>>
>>> So you want us to do a new release? Fine, whatever, we can just roll a
>>> new release which has the source distribution configured. That was a
>>> mistake in the first place as it makes the bundles not easily
>>> individually buildable.
>>>
>>> However, we still will not have a combined source release as we want
>>> to be able to release our bundles individually. Is that the resolution
>>> then? All we have to do is a do a micro release with the source
>>> distribution configured on a per artifact level?
>>>
>> I agree the requirement for a single source release doesn't seem
>> totally clear, I've said I think you should have one and so has sebb,
>> it would be good to hear what other Incubator PMC people think. I
>> think you need one for two main reasons:
>>
>> 1) The ASF deals with source and the releases are how users get hold
>> of that source. If a user is going to do development with the released
>> ACE source they likely aren't going to be able to do very much useful
>> with just single things like org.apache.ace.repository.imp. At the
>> very least they're probably going to want
>> org.apache.ace.repository.api too but likely there is a big network of
>> the 60 something ACE modules that anyone doing most non-trivial ACE
>> development is going to want. One source distribution makes this easy,
>> making them have to download them all separately isn't particularly
>> practical. That https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ace/trunk/
>> is structured so the ASF committers can work with them as one single
>> buildable checkout i think shows thats true.
>>
>> 2) If there is only individually buildable source for each jar how are
>> people really going to verify that the release is actually buildable
>> and the artifacts match the SVN tag source when reviewing and voting
>> on release votes? No one reviewing is really likely to download 60
>> separate distros and build them all one by one are they?
>
> I disagree. There seems to be some misunderstanding that there is one single
> product that must be built.
>
> When you develop independently evolving modules, "big bang" releases do not
> make sense. Each module has its own release cycle. Occasionally you may end
> up creating some sort of "distribution" out of the modules and release that,
> but that is just one potential distribution.
>

I agree thats an approach used and works in many projects but if that
was really the case _here_  then surely the SVN would be structured so
that there were separate trunk/branch/tag folders for each module,
there would have been more releases than just the single 0.8.0
release, and there would be separate release votes for each module
being released.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Fw: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

Gosh. Well perhaps its me that needs to go back to school then. But i
find this most unexpected. The ASF FAQ on what is a release says "All
releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
changes to the software being released." if no unit tests are included
in the source release can anyone seriously be expected to be able to
make non-trivial changes to the source? I now wonder what is the point
of the source release at all, other than IDE debugging or reading
APIs, for real development you'd ave to get the SVN tag. And there is
the how to vote on the release artifacts too, other than checking
theres no compile errors how do release reviewers know the release is
good, or with 60 something modules to manually build is there really
any expectation that anyone other than the RM even attempts a build?

   ...ant


On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Joe Schaefer  wrote:
> Shipping tests is not a formal requirement of a release.
> httpd certainly doesn't offer its test suite as part of
> a release- you have to download that (from svn) yourself.
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: sebb 
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org; Joe Schaefer 
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:59 AM
>> Subject: Re: Fw: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator
>>
>> On 21 November 2011 15:48, Joe Schaefer  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  - Forwarded Message -
>>>> From: Joe Schaefer 
>>>> To: Karl Pauls ;
>> "general@incubator.apache.org" 
>>>> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:44 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Hard to build" isn't a blocking criterion
>>>> for a release; so long as the artifacts can
>>>> be built from the distributed source files
>>>> using a repeatable and documented process you
>>>> are ok in my book.  Downloading a pom from
>>>> an ASF mirror or from maven central doesn't
>>>> appearon the surface to be contradicting
>>>> what Iwrote in the first sentence here.
>>>>
>>>> ("Downloading" from svn.a.o would be a problem
>>>> tho.)
>>
>> That is the case for the JUnit tests, which are not included in the
>> source jars as far as I can tell.
>>
>>>>
>>>> In any case, if you can make building from
>>>> source more convenient for end-users, that
>>>> would certainly count as an improvement.
>>>> But holding up graduation until that is
>>>>
>>>> actually done makes zero sense to me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>  From: Karl Pauls 
>>>>> To: general@incubator.apache.org; Joe Schaefer
>> 
>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:38 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Joe Schaefer
>>  wrote:
>>>>>>  I'm confused.  In /dist/incubator/ace/, there appears
>>>>>>  to be an *.incubator-sources.* file for each independent
>>>>>>  module in the release.  Are those not actually what they
>>>>>>  are advertised to be?  What exactly is the problem with
>>>>>>  the previous release?
>>>>>
>>>>> It has been argued that they are hard to build because they
>> don't
>>>>> contain the pom files (they are in the dist dir too, but as another
>>>>> download). We forgot to configure that in the build. Typically, we
>>>>> make it so that the source artifacts contain the pom as well so all
>>>>> you have to do is to unzip the source distro of a module, cd into
>> it,
>>>>> and mvn clean install. In this case, you have to download the pom
>>>>> first as
>>>  well.
>>>>>
>>>>> regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  From: Alex Karasulu 
>>>>>>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:23 AM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Karl Pauls
>

Re: Fw: [VOTE] Graduate ACE from the Apache Incubator

[ant elder]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Benson Margulies  wrote:

>
> On the other hand, where have we been all this time? They've shipped
> as many releases as they've shipped, and gotten votes from this PMC,
> and now, at the time of the graduation vote, all this produces a ton
> of email?
>

I agree with that point so for me at least I'll stop replying on this
thread and continue on the board@ source thread or start other ones
here on general@.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: should podlings have informal chairs?

[ant elder]

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
 wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:05 AM, Sam Ruby  wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Joe Schaefer  wrote:
>>>... We should be reporting to the board about OUR work, not the work of
>>> the podlings.  Podlings should only be brought in for a few specific
>>> examplesto mention.  That's the first thing to correct.
>>
>> +1
>
> I agree as well, and for this to work we need a few IPMC members to
> review reports every month (volunteers?), and someone to coordinate
> (Noel?).
>

I already read the poddling reports most months, mainly just for my
own interest i don't do anything with what i learn, and most reports
are pretty rosy and lack enough real detail to get much of an idea
about where a poddling is really at. I do agree that it could be could
to update the Incubator reporting. Noel always starts the report with
a couple of paragraphs of summary/overview which i think has been
good, perhaps we just need to extend that and to have other Incubator
PMC members give more input on anything significant they have. I'm not
sure that i get what all this hooha is about though, if a poddling
misses a few reports doesn't that in itself paint a picture of where
the poddling is at? The Incubator policy page has a reasonably concise
list of Minimum Graduation Requirements and most of them aren't that
hard to do, the main one that often holds things up is "Demonstrate an
active and diverse development community". Do we just need to
add/remove/clarify these graduation requirements? We could start more
proactively terminating poddlings that don't look like they're making
it but I'm not sure i understand why we'd want to rush that, what is
the problem with having a poddling incubate for more than a year, its
not like they're eating up resources, and why all this blaming the
mentors?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating

[ant elder]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Alan D. Cabrera  wrote:
>
> On Nov 23, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
>
>> Alan,
>>
 It's unfortunate that the vote only took 24 hours on the Kafka list; it
>> was my understanding that votes take 72 hours.
>>
>> Because the only change was in the NOTICE and DISCLAIMER files from
>> previous RC, our champion (Chris C) suggested we could run a quicker lazy
>> 24 hour vote.
>
> Yeah, I'm not sure the vote can be shortened.  I could be wrong.  If it can 
> then I totally agree with the inclination to get goin' with this release.  
> I'm sorry it's had so many first and starts.
>
 Anyway, I've found some problems in the NOTICE file in that Kafka
>> uses/ship NUnit but it's not in the NOTICE file.
>>
>> Quoting sebb and Kafka's champion (Chris C) discussed this in the last vote
>> -
>>
> 4) Your NOTICE file includes lot's of "This product includes X,
>> developed by X.org" Your notice file should only include notices that you
>> are *required* to have. Don't include acknowledgements in your notice file
>> just for completeness.
>>
> Just to be clear: why not?
>>
>> *>>> The NOTICE file should be as short as possible, but no shorter.
>> *
>> Having said that, we also don't have any jar like "NUnit" in the release
>> artifacts.
>
>  B     ./bin/../clients/csharp/lib/nunit/2.5.9/nunit.framework.dll
>
> Reading the license
>
> http://www.nunit.org/index.php?p=license&r=2.5.9
>
> it seems to me that an acknowledgment  in the product documentation is 
> required.  Am I misreading their license?  (wouldn't be the first time)
>

I don't remember that license coming up before so the easiest way to
find out is to bring it up at legal-discuss@. A similar question was
raised in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-59 and the
conclusion there was it didn't have to be in the NOTICE. This is not
exactly the same but it is similar so maybe it would be ok for this
release could go ahead assuming its ok and raise a legal JIRA to
confirm that for the future?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Does Apache Have a 'Rule' Problem, or does the Incubator sometimes just make it look that way?

[ant elder]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Benson Margulies  wrote:
> When the hot air manufacturers start ragging on us, one of the usual
> tags that they paint is 'rules' and 'bureaucracy'. If you read
> general@, you will see a fairly regular occurrence that feeds this
> perception.
>
> Someone poses a question about NOTICE files, or IP, or release structure.
>
> If they are lucky, they get 3 disagreeing responses in short order.
> Why lucky? Because that gives them a clue that perhaps none of them
> are the right answer. If they are unlucky, they get a one answer,
> confidently worded. And then they put in hours of work based on that
> answer.
>
> Time passes. A release, or even a graduation vote arrives. Suddenly,
> some crusty veteran arrives on the scene to tell them that what
> they've done is wrong, or inadequate, or purple.
>
> This is not precisely wonderful from a PR standpoint.
>
> What can we do as a PMC to improve this?
>

I don't think there are actually that many rules, its certainly much
better than it used to be, a lot of the things have been clarified
like the contents of the NOTICE file and there are now simple
procedures in place for other things for example like raising a JIRA
with legal to clarify licensing questions.

One of the causes of problems i think is knowing how to deal with
questions or objections - if someone says something is wrong then ask
for the link to where thats documented if they don't have one its
probably not a rule or it maybe you could ignore the issue for now
till it is documented, if its a link to a CTR type guide or info page
then that doesn't mean the page is actually true so if you think its
wrong you could try just changing the page to match what you think is
correct.

Another thing that can help is to keep reminding about which
situations a  -1s is a veto, they're not in many situations including
release votes so if there's -1 which you think its a wacko one then
don't have a massive argument just ignore it.

Another thing that helps is giving people the chance to talk about
things without appearing disruptive - eg have a [DISCUSS] thread
before a [VOTE].

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Clarify the role of the Champion as an "incubation coordinator" (was: should podlings have informal chairs?)

[ant elder]

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Ross Gardler
 wrote:
> On 24 November 2011 17:17, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> I had hoped that the business of a PPMC-member champion being a VP-elect 
>> would have just gone away.  That coupling is certain to inspire political 
>> motivation and purpose.
>>
>> I think that's a terrible trick to play on a PPMC.
>
> I think you may be missing a nuance in the suggestion below.
>
> The chair of a PMC is a VP of the foundation. It is not a role of
> power rather responsibility within the project (although admittedly
> the title can be important outside the ASF - that's the reward for
> some people).
>
> The suggestion below is that at some point during incubation the
> podling should elect their own champion who will take on the
> responsibilities of the champion.

I've not made up my mind about this proposal, not totally convinced
yet its a good idea though either.

If a poddling can get it together to elect their own champion aren't
they likely to be about ready to graduate anyway?

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3

[ant elder]

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Benson Margulies  wrote:
> I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about the NOTICE file
> based on recent traffic here.

LOL

> Unfortunately, that conversation left me
> with a giant headache and no clear idea.
>
> The issue is that there's a misc acknowledgement in there which is not
> a relocated IP notice. Are those OK, or not? (@Leo, help!)
>

Not including something in the NOTICE that must be required might be a
blocking problem but including just a little more than is necessary
isn't IMHO. If it was a podling release with so much unnecessary stuff
that it showed they didn't really understand the requirements maybe
thats worth voting against so they go and sort it out but for
something like this i think its ok to say sort it out later

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating

[ant elder]

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Alan D. Cabrera  wrote:
>
> On Nov 24, 2011, at 1:59 AM, ant elder wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Alan D. Cabrera  
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Nov 23, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alan,
>>>>
>>>>>> It's unfortunate that the vote only took 24 hours on the Kafka list; it
>>>> was my understanding that votes take 72 hours.
>>>>
>>>> Because the only change was in the NOTICE and DISCLAIMER files from
>>>> previous RC, our champion (Chris C) suggested we could run a quicker lazy
>>>> 24 hour vote.
>>>
>>> Yeah, I'm not sure the vote can be shortened.  I could be wrong.  If it can 
>>> then I totally agree with the inclination to get goin' with this release.  
>>> I'm sorry it's had so many first and starts.
>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, I've found some problems in the NOTICE file in that Kafka
>>>> uses/ship NUnit but it's not in the NOTICE file.
>>>>
>>>> Quoting sebb and Kafka's champion (Chris C) discussed this in the last vote
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>>>>> 4) Your NOTICE file includes lot's of "This product includes X,
>>>> developed by X.org" Your notice file should only include notices that you
>>>> are *required* to have. Don't include acknowledgements in your notice file
>>>> just for completeness.
>>>>
>>>>>>> Just to be clear: why not?
>>>>
>>>> *>>> The NOTICE file should be as short as possible, but no shorter.
>>>> *
>>>> Having said that, we also don't have any jar like "NUnit" in the release
>>>> artifacts.
>>>
>>>  B     ./bin/../clients/csharp/lib/nunit/2.5.9/nunit.framework.dll
>>>
>>> Reading the license
>>>
>>> http://www.nunit.org/index.php?p=license&r=2.5.9
>>>
>>> it seems to me that an acknowledgment  in the product documentation is 
>>> required.  Am I misreading their license?  (wouldn't be the first time)
>>>
>>
>> I don't remember that license coming up before so the easiest way to
>> find out is to bring it up at legal-discuss@. A similar question was
>> raised in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-59 and the
>> conclusion there was it didn't have to be in the NOTICE. This is not
>> exactly the same but it is similar so maybe it would be ok for this
>> release could go ahead assuming its ok and raise a legal JIRA to
>> confirm that for the future?
>
> The tgz files are the product that's being distributed.  It's clear that the 
> NUnit license requires an acknowledgement somewhere in the product.
>

Earlier you said nunit was missing from the NOTICE so thats what I was
replying about, but I think what you meant was that it was missing
from the LICENSE too right? This does appear to ship the nunit dll and
not mention that in the LICENSE file and that does seem like something
that needs to be fixed.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3

[ant elder]

On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Marvin Humphrey  wrote:

>
> Not as frustrating as putting up a release candidate which twists in the wind
> for weeks waiting for a IPMC member to review because Mentors are awol!  The
> few individuals who do this thankless work on a regular basis are crucial to
> the functioning of the Incubator, and are doing far more than their share to
> make up for a collective failure.

If something is waiting for weeks then send reminder emails about it.
Its easy to miss things and if a couple of days go past with all the
email traffic they drop way off the bottom of a screen full of emails.
Heck if even a couple of days go past start sending reminder emails
every day.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3

[ant elder]

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 6:50 AM, Stefan Bodewig  wrote:

> Can anybody please point me to the result of the conversation that
> defines our current understanding of what goes into NOTICE and what
> doesn't so I don't give bad advice to podlings?  I'm pretty sure this
> must have changed over the years and I was conditioned with a different
> interpretation from what it is now.
>
> Is it
>
> 
> 
>
> (which fortunately don't disagree with each other)
>
> ?
>

I think a little while back it seemed to be understood that pretty
much any copyright you might find in the project code or any of the
licenses it used should be copied into the NOTICE file, and thats why
you see some NOTICE file with lots of content. Thats changed and now
the view is there are very few things that should actually be added to
the notice file.

The most authoritative place is the link those links already link to -
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice - which says "...The
remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required third-party
notices.". The problem is that what are "required third-party notices"
is not really described anywhere.

There was some helpful discussion about this in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-59 and the ML discussion
around that, for example,
http://apache.markmail.org/message/u66o5ucyfquxjl7i?q=LEGAL-59, and
theres also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-62

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating

[ant elder]

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 1:07 AM, sebb  wrote:
> On 25 November 2011 20:11, ant elder  wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Alan D. Cabrera  
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Nov 24, 2011, at 1:59 AM, ant elder wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Alan D. Cabrera  
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 23, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Alan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's unfortunate that the vote only took 24 hours on the Kafka list; it
>>>>>> was my understanding that votes take 72 hours.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because the only change was in the NOTICE and DISCLAIMER files from
>>>>>> previous RC, our champion (Chris C) suggested we could run a quicker lazy
>>>>>> 24 hour vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah, I'm not sure the vote can be shortened.  I could be wrong.  If it 
>>>>> can then I totally agree with the inclination to get goin' with this 
>>>>> release.  I'm sorry it's had so many first and starts.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyway, I've found some problems in the NOTICE file in that Kafka
>>>>>> uses/ship NUnit but it's not in the NOTICE file.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Quoting sebb and Kafka's champion (Chris C) discussed this in the last 
>>>>>> vote
>>>>>> -
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 4) Your NOTICE file includes lot's of "This product includes X,
>>>>>> developed by X.org" Your notice file should only include notices that you
>>>>>> are *required* to have. Don't include acknowledgements in your notice 
>>>>>> file
>>>>>> just for completeness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just to be clear: why not?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *>>> The NOTICE file should be as short as possible, but no shorter.
>>>>>> *
>>>>>> Having said that, we also don't have any jar like "NUnit" in the release
>>>>>> artifacts.
>>>>>
>>>>>  B     ./bin/../clients/csharp/lib/nunit/2.5.9/nunit.framework.dll
>>>>>
>>>>> Reading the license
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.nunit.org/index.php?p=license&r=2.5.9
>>>>>
>>>>> it seems to me that an acknowledgment  in the product documentation is 
>>>>> required.  Am I misreading their license?  (wouldn't be the first time)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't remember that license coming up before so the easiest way to
>>>> find out is to bring it up at legal-discuss@. A similar question was
>>>> raised in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-59 and the
>>>> conclusion there was it didn't have to be in the NOTICE. This is not
>>>> exactly the same but it is similar so maybe it would be ok for this
>>>> release could go ahead assuming its ok and raise a legal JIRA to
>>>> confirm that for the future?
>>>
>>> The tgz files are the product that's being distributed.  It's clear that 
>>> the NUnit license requires an acknowledgement somewhere in the product.
>>>
>>
>> Earlier you said nunit was missing from the NOTICE so thats what I was
>> replying about, but I think what you meant was that it was missing
>> from the LICENSE too right? This does appear to ship the nunit dll and
>> not mention that in the LICENSE file and that does seem like something
>> that needs to be fixed.
>
> In which case, any unnecessary entries in the NOTICE file should be
> removed at the same time please.
>

Right, and this is going to require yet another respin and its already
RC7 it might be worth posting back here with the SVN URLs to the
LICENSE/NOTICE files after the updates are done but before the new RC
has been made so we can help confirm it all looks ok. I also think you
could CC the new vote thread to general@ and run the dev and incubator
vote in parallel to save a bit of time.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Does Apache Have a 'Rule' Problem, or does the Incubator sometimes just make it look that way?

[ant elder]

On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
 wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Christian Grobmeier
>  wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
>>  wrote:
 +1
 And while we are at it, reduce Roles and Rules to a minimum.
>>>
>>> Pruning is always useful but when the Incubator ran with fewer rules
>>> and roles, the process ran much less smoothly which took much more
>>> energy to supervise. I'm not sure that there's enough energy to
>>> supervise so many projects without a smooth process.
>>
>> The process is not smooth, thats why more rules are currently in
>> discussion. Supervising has already failed in some projects. Adding
>> these new rules do not necessary mean that supervising is better;
>> actually I doubt (and have said so).
>
> +1
>
>> Have not seen a pruning recently. My feeling is we are adding more and
>> more rules to a huge rule framework. And it feels always the same
>> people are adding these rules and no one can stop them (not meant as
>> an insult).
>
> It's easy to stop: just start a VOTE or -1 a documentation commit
>
> For example, the issue with the trademark check list item could be
> dealt with either by an effort to provide detailed guidance or by
> dropping the requirement from the check list by telling the board that
> the Incubator expects the brand team to approve names for podlings. If
> you have a strong opinion that we should just drop the requirement,
> jump into the thread.
>
>> This is what frustrates me very much and will prevent me
>> actually to waste more energy in rules/politics discussions.
>
> Then focus your energy on doing, not discussing. Find one example
> which illustrates your criticism and prune it.
>
>> I have no suggestions how to do better at the moment. But adding more
>> and more rules cannot be the solution. I mean this is no fun. We are
>> acting like a company more and more. The time you need to understand,
>> teach and develop this rules are not to underestimate. We even have a
>> code of conduct. That all is no prime time stuff anymore and no fun.
>> And in my world, Open Source is not only a business model, it is fun
>> at first place. And this means, less but efficient rules.
>
> Rules based systems fail to scale
>
> 
>
>> Cheers,
>> Christian
>> who is very frustrated at the recent developments on the ASF.
>
> Then jump in and get involved with improving stuff :-)
>
> Robert
>

Yeah I agree with Robert though I do acknowledge that it can be really
hard to get some things changed and you may need a thick skin and lots
of perseverance. But lets try to demonstrate its possible - Christian
tell us three things you'd like changed and we'll pick one and try to
fix it right here right now just to show it can be done.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3

[ant elder]

Looks ok to me. In future releases it might be good to consider
including a release notes type file that mentions whats been updated
in the release.

+1

   ...ant

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Prescott Nasser  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We could use another vote or two,
>
> Thanks!
>
> -P
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> 
> From: Benson Margulies
> Sent: 11/25/2011 11:56 AM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Lucene.Net 2.9.4-incubating-RC3
>
> Well, fine, I am happy to +1.
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Alan D. Cabrera  wrote:
>>
>> On Nov 25, 2011, at 8:32 AM, ant elder wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Benson Margulies  
>>> wrote:
>>>> I hate to have to say this, but I have concerns about the NOTICE file
>>>> based on recent traffic here.
>>>
>>> LOL
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, that conversation left me
>>>> with a giant headache and no clear idea.
>>>>
>>>> The issue is that there's a misc acknowledgement in there which is not
>>>> a relocated IP notice. Are those OK, or not? (@Leo, help!)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not including something in the NOTICE that must be required might be a
>>> blocking problem but including just a little more than is necessary
>>> isn't IMHO. If it was a podling release with so much unnecessary stuff
>>> that it showed they didn't really understand the requirements maybe
>>> thats worth voting against so they go and sort it out but for
>>> something like this i think its ok to say sort it out later
>>
>> I am of the same opinion here.   I think that some votes on this list are 
>> overly critical, often laden with personal opinions and not real Foundation 
>> requirements.  This leads to a very frustrating experience to new podling 
>> members who are unable to tell the difference.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alan
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: concerns about high overhead in Apache incubator releases

[ant elder]

On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Jun Rao  wrote:
> Dear Apache members,
>
> Over the past 2 months, the Kafka Apache incubator project has been trying
> to release its very first version in Apache. After 7 RCs, we are still not
> done. Part of this is because most of us are new to the Apache release
> process and are learning things along the way. However, I think Apache can
> do a better job in the incubating process to make releases much less
> painful. In the following, I will summarize some of problems that we
> had experienced. This is not an accusation, nor is it personal. I just hope
> that we can all learn from our experience so that Kafka and other incubator
> projects can release more smoothly in the future.
>
> 1. There is no good example to follow.
> As a new incubator project, the natural thing for us to do when it comes to
> releasing our code is to follow what other Apache projects do. However,
> more than once, the feedback that we got is that those are not good
> examples to follow. It seems that those "bad" examples are not isolated
> cases.
>
> 2. Different Apache members have different interpretations of the same rule.
> It seems that there is no consensus on some of the basic rules even among
> Apache members. For example, what constitutes a source distribution and
> what should be put in the NOTICE file? Since all it takes is one negative
> vote to block a release, this increases the turnover rate of RCs.
>
> 3. Not enough constructive and comprehensive suggestions.
> Some of the issues that are present in Kafka RC7 exist in RC1. Those issues
> could have been resolved much earlier had there been more constructive and
> comprehensive feedbacks from early on. Instead, often, the feedback just
> points out the violation of one or two issues that are enough to block a
> release. People like Ant Edler have made some constructive suggestions and
> we really appreciate that. We could use more suggestions like that.
>
> 4. Not enough flexibility in applying the rules.
> Some of the rules don't make common sense. For example, if we publish a new
> RC that simply fixes a few lines in NOTICE/LICENSE. We are still required
> to go through a full 3-day vote in Kafka and another full 3-day vote in
> Apache general. This, coupled with the high turnover rate of RCs, can delay
> the release for a significant long time. Both Chris Douglas and Ant Edler
> wanted to relax the rule slightly to help us speed things up. However, not
> every Apache member tolerates such flexibility. Again, all it takes is just
> one vote to kill a release.
>
> To summarize, our experience of releasing in Apache has not been very
> pleasant so far. I am not sure if our experience is the exception or the
> norm among incubator projects. In any case, I sincerely hope that at least
> some of those concerns can be addressed in Apache to make the release
> process more enjoyable, especially for new comers.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jun
>

I'd like to apologize on behalf of the Incubator for this less than
excellent experience with your first release. Releases can be hard and
they are one of the top things poddlings need to learn how to do but
we should have been a bit better at teaching this and not let this
release become such a long drawn out and painful process.

As others have also commented in this email thread releases can't be
veto'ed so just because you have a -1 or negative comment doesn't mean
you need to respin right away. It does mean though that others might
be put off from voting +1 so if that happens get your mentors to sort
out it if its an issue or not, and don't be shy about emailing them
directly if they are not participating already.

Your email also mentions "rules" in several places - there aren't that
many rules so before assuming something really is a rule try to find
where its document that it is, and if no one can find that doc then
its not a rule. Also, rules are only defined on policy pages so just
because some "guide" type page says something doesn't make it true.
For example, the comment about needing to vote once on kafka-dev for
72 hours and then again on general@ for another 72 hours - nothing
says that must happen, if you like start right off here on general@,
or, keep it just on kafka-dev and persuade three Incubator PMC members
to vote over there (though you should probably notify general@ thats
happening just so we know). In fact, even the minimum of 72 hours
isn't a rule - the voting page people have been pointing you to only
says "Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least 72
hours..." so there is flexibility there.

However those comments aside you do still need to try to make your
release artifacts reasonably correct. Once you've got this done in the
first release it becomes less of a pain later because it likely wont
change that much in subsequent releases. A problem with doing this for
Kafka is that it has quite a lot of dependencies, 54 jars by a quick
count, so its a big job trackin

Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)

[ant elder]

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:34 AM, sebb  wrote:
> On 29 November 2011 22:25, Jukka Zitting  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:30 PM, sebb  wrote:
>>> But if the team already agrees that the changes need to be made, why
>>> not do so and re-roll?
>>
>> I'd just leave that up to the release manager to decide.
>>
>> There's no such thing as a perfect release (all non-trivial software
>> has errors), so unless the fix is already available and the RM willing
>> to do the extra effort I wouldn't stress too much about getting such
>> non-critical changes in until the next release.
>
> I would question whether these N&L errors are non-critical.
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain
>
> says
>
> "Every ASF release *must* comply with ASF licensing policy. This
> requirement is of utmost importance and an audit should be performed
> before any full release is created. In particular, every artifact
> distributed must contain appropriate LICENSE and NOTICE files."
>
> I read this as meaning that the N&L files are (one of) the most
> important part(s) of a release.
>

I agree they're important and we need to teach poddlings how to do
them correctly and they must not be missing things that are included
in the release, but i still say that having some unnecessary content
in the LICENSE or NOTICE is not necessarily a blocker. No one is going
to sue the ASF if a release includes a license or notice that it
actually doesn't need, so its down to the poddling to decide if they
want to respin to remove it.

   ...ant

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Voting time period can be shortened ? (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)

[ant elder]

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Neha Narkhede  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The context for this is the discussion here -
> http://markmail.org/message/rsxjgrrufc6khlqy?q=overhead+list:org.apache.incubator.general
>
> This was a long discussion with no clear answers.
>
> We would like to know if it is OK to either -
>
> 1. shorten the release VOTE for change to one non-code file

The voting policy only says:

"Votes should generally be permitted to run for at least 72 hours to
provide an opportunity for all concerned persons to participate
regardless of their geographic locations." -
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

So nothing there says 72 hours is an absolute minimum. I've seen TLPs
do releases in less than 72 hours, usually to fix something like a
very serious issue in a previous release. And this was discussed on
this list a year or so ago and consensus was that that was ok. That
should be fine for poddlings too but I'd expect you'd need a very good
reason to convince three Incubator PMC members to vote for a release
like that.

> 2. run 72 hour vote in parallel on the dev list as well as on general@
>

Thats totally fine and happens often, as Paul pointed out Libcloud did
that for most of its releases and many other poddlings have too. If a
poddling keeps sending low quality releases to votes on general@
people might stop bothering to review and vote on them so poddlings
probably only want to do this once they're a bit confident with their
releases.

> What we would like to know is if any member would "-1" the vote if we
> choose to do either of the above ?
>

Even if they did a -1 on a release vote is not a veto.

> Thanks,
> Neha

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org