Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
> > If you look at the GitHub code reviews > (https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pulls), you'll see that lots of > people are contributing to reviewing. But I agree that the new committer > onboarding process should include having them do a test commit. > Matei: Reviews being done on github causes me a bit of concern. Generally dev@ should be the nexus for a project, and most of the projects that have github in the workflow ensure that pull requests get sent to dev@ so the discussions, reviews, and patches themselves are seen and archived there. I see that one of your mentors brought up similar concerns about this (as well as where discussions on strategy or roadmap happen) yesterday on dev@ - that doesn't leave me with warm fuzzy assurance that the project groks the Apache way. --David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] Release of Apache Olingo 1.1.0 incubating (RC03)
Hi IPMC members, Olingo is waiting to get a third vote for our current release candidate. We would really appreciate if someone could have a look at this. Thanks & Best Regards, Christian -Original Message- From: Dave Brondsema [mailto:d...@brondsema.net] Sent: Dienstag, 4. Februar 2014 23:06 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Olingo 1.1.0 incubating (RC03) On 2/4/14 6:39 AM, Amend, Christian wrote: > Hi Dave, > > thanks for your feedback :) > > The parent zip file is a pure source distribution. The README contains this > paragraph because we have these dependencies when building or deploying our > project but they are not included in the zip file and thus are not mentioned > in the LICENSE file. > If you have a look at our dist-* (e.g. dist-ref) packages they contain the > necessary licenses in the LICENSE file for the binary sources they include. I see. Your dist-* zip files look from what I can tell. However, I would like it if another IPMC member could take a look and give you the 3rd +1, since I do not have a lot of experience assessing licensing for binary jar releases. > > The sha files were built with sha512 and I think we will change the naming > there for the next release to make this more clear. > > The way I understood the paragraph in [1] is that if you make changes to the > mandatory text it has to be approved by the Incubator PMC. Since we did not > change this and only added our website at the end I hope this is within the > acceptable range. Nevertheless if this is no show stopper I will address this > on our mailing list after the release. Right, it probably is just fine how you have it, so not a show stopper. Just a little bit more proper for a future release. > > Thanks & Best Regards, > Christian > > [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html#disclaimers > > -Original Message- > From: Dave Brondsema [mailto:d...@brondsema.net] > Sent: Dienstag, 4. Februar 2014 06:52 > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Olingo 1.1.0 incubating (RC03) > > Hello Christian, and Olingo team. > > So far I have only looked at > olingo-odata2-parent-incubating-1.1.0-RC03-source-release.zip since it seemed > like the main source file. I also haven't tried to build it, since it's been > a > long time since I've done any Java :) > > The last section in the README file states there are dual licenses, weak > copyleft dependencies, etc, and refers to the LICENSE file for details. The > LICENSE file only has the AL2 in it. Are there additional licenses used in > Olingo? If so, they should be properly referenced in the LICENSE file. If > not, > the README shouldn't state such things. I wouldn't put any licensing info in > the README either way, the LICENSE file should cover that in a single > document. > > The DISCLAIMER file has extra content (after the 3rd paragraph) that is not > needed. It doesn't seem harmful to me, but > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html#disclaimers is pretty clear > about using exact text without changes. I also agree with Francesco on your > dev > list about removing blank lines from NOTICE. > > What format are the .sha files? I tried all the sha*sum commands on my system > and none produced anything even similar. I suggest naming them *.sha1 or > *.sha512 for example. > > -Dave > > > On 1/31/14 9:18 AM, Amend, Christian wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> This is a call for a vote on Apache Olingo 1.1.0 incubating. This is our 3rd >> try >> of our 2nd release. We have resolved all issues which were discussed since >> our >> 1st release candidate. >> >> Apache Olingo is a library implementing OData V2 protocol specification. >> >> A vote was held on the Olingo developer mailing list and it passed with >> eight +1 >> votes where two +1 votes came from our mentors. The vote had zero -1 or 0 >> votes >> (see the vote thread [1] and result thread [2]), and now requires a vote on >> this >> list. >> >> The vote will be open for 72 hours and passes if a majority of at least 3 +1 >> IPMC votes are cast. >> >> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Olingo 1.1.0 incubating >> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... >> >> Best Regards, >> Christian >> >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/ugfeqpzjxrnedpqn >> [2] http://markmail.org/message/uiklgm25o7upks3t >> >> Resources >> >> The release candidate is available here: >> http://people.apache.org/~chrisam/olingo2/1.1.0-RC03/ >> >> The release candidate has been signed through the key 475D9522 in: >> http://keyserver.kjsl.org:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x475D9522&op=vindex >> >> The project KEYS file is available here: >> https://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/olingo/KEYS >> >> The release candidate is based on the sources tagged with 1.1.0-RC03: >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-olingo-odata2.git;a=commit;h=58849673f6eeb1817d7c952ef11667989b8a994a >> and is base
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on Review Board? If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored on the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@. I would assume that any comment on them should as well. [1] http://developer.github.com/v3/repos/hooks/ -- Joyce On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:22 AM, David Nalley wrote: > > > > If you look at the GitHub code reviews ( > https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pulls), you'll see that lots of > people are contributing to reviewing. But I agree that the new committer > onboarding process should include having them do a test commit. > > > > Matei: > > Reviews being done on github causes me a bit of concern. Generally > dev@ should be the nexus for a project, and most of the projects that > have github in the workflow ensure that pull requests get sent to dev@ > so the discussions, reviews, and patches themselves are seen and > archived there. > > I see that one of your mentors brought up similar concerns about this > (as well as where discussions on strategy or roadmap happen) yesterday > on dev@ - that doesn't leave me with warm fuzzy assurance that the > project groks the Apache way. > > --David > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
Having developer/committer comments from a github review automatically show up on dev@ lists will ease my concern that the git activities somehow avoid the "if it isn't on the mail lists, it didn't happen" requirement. Craig On Feb 6, 2014, at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: > How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on Review > Board? If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately > mirrored on the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. > There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not > mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@. I > would assume that any comment on them should as well. > > > [1] http://developer.github.com/v3/repos/hooks/ > > > -- Joyce > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:22 AM, David Nalley wrote: > >>> >>> If you look at the GitHub code reviews ( >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pulls), you'll see that lots of >> people are contributing to reviewing. But I agree that the new committer >> onboarding process should include having them do a test commit. >>> >> >> Matei: >> >> Reviews being done on github causes me a bit of concern. Generally >> dev@ should be the nexus for a project, and most of the projects that >> have github in the workflow ensure that pull requests get sent to dev@ >> so the discussions, reviews, and patches themselves are seen and >> archived there. >> >> I see that one of your mentors brought up similar concerns about this >> (as well as where discussions on strategy or roadmap happen) yesterday >> on dev@ - that doesn't leave me with warm fuzzy assurance that the >> project groks the Apache way. >> >> --David >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> Craig L Russell Architect, Oracle http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@oracle.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
This got me to thinking. If git is the working tool of the team, and actions from the git site are automatically forwarded to dev, how about putting release votes on git? Could an action item be created in git by the release manager to release, say, version 3.4.5 of the code? Voting could be done by comments from the community. After the time expires, votes are tallied. Only PMC votes binding, of course. As long as dev@ contains all the feedback from voters, I'd be satisfied that the "vote on the release" requirement was satisfied. Craig On Feb 6, 2014, at 9:28 AM, Craig L Russell wrote: > Having developer/committer comments from a github review automatically show > up on dev@ lists will ease my concern that the git activities somehow avoid > the "if it isn't on the mail lists, it didn't happen" requirement. > > Craig > > On Feb 6, 2014, at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: > >> How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on Review >> Board? If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately >> mirrored on the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. >> There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not >> mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@. I >> would assume that any comment on them should as well. >> >> >> [1] http://developer.github.com/v3/repos/hooks/ >> >> >> -- Joyce >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:22 AM, David Nalley wrote: >> If you look at the GitHub code reviews ( >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pulls), you'll see that lots of >>> people are contributing to reviewing. But I agree that the new committer >>> onboarding process should include having them do a test commit. >>> >>> Matei: >>> >>> Reviews being done on github causes me a bit of concern. Generally >>> dev@ should be the nexus for a project, and most of the projects that >>> have github in the workflow ensure that pull requests get sent to dev@ >>> so the discussions, reviews, and patches themselves are seen and >>> archived there. >>> >>> I see that one of your mentors brought up similar concerns about this >>> (as well as where discussions on strategy or roadmap happen) yesterday >>> on dev@ - that doesn't leave me with warm fuzzy assurance that the >>> project groks the Apache way. >>> >>> --David >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>> >>> > > Craig L Russell > Architect, Oracle > http://db.apache.org/jdo > 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@oracle.com > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > Craig L Russell Architect, Oracle http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@oracle.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: > How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on Review > Board? One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. > If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored on > the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to ensure that all of its communications are properly archived. If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I encourage you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also encourage everyone to ponder carefully: * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing communications in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF Infra labor costs. > There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not > mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@. That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does that[1][2]. > I would assume that any comment on them should as well. Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev lists? They are not. Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and that includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are properly documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's direct responsibility. Marvin Humphrey [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
The webhooks are in place to send pr notifications from github to the dev@lists, the problem is that comments do not get sent only the actions of opening and closing of the pr are sent. -Jake On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Michael Joyce wrote: > How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on Review > Board? If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately > mirrored on the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. > There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not > mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@. > I > would assume that any comment on them should as well. > > > [1] http://developer.github.com/v3/repos/hooks/ > > > -- Joyce > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:22 AM, David Nalley wrote: > > > > > > > If you look at the GitHub code reviews ( > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-spark/pulls), you'll see that lots > of > > people are contributing to reviewing. But I agree that the new committer > > onboarding process should include having them do a test commit. > > > > > > > Matei: > > > > Reviews being done on github causes me a bit of concern. Generally > > dev@ should be the nexus for a project, and most of the projects that > > have github in the workflow ensure that pull requests get sent to dev@ > > so the discussions, reviews, and patches themselves are seen and > > archived there. > > > > I see that one of your mentors brought up similar concerns about this > > (as well as where discussions on strategy or roadmap happen) yesterday > > on dev@ - that doesn't leave me with warm fuzzy assurance that the > > project groks the Apache way. > > > > --David > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
HI Marvin, The automatic email to dev@ list for github mirror PR, does it happen for all ASF github mirrors or each podling need to do some setup to make it work? - Henry On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: >> How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on Review >> Board? > > One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. > >> If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored on >> the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. > > It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to ensure > that all of its communications are properly archived. > > If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I encourage > you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also encourage > everyone to ponder carefully: > > * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing communications > in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. > * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF Infra > labor costs. > >> There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not >> mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@. > > That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does that[1][2]. > >> I would assume that any comment on them should as well. > > Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev lists? > They are not. > > Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and that > includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are properly > documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of > archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's direct > responsibility. > > Marvin Humphrey > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 > [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx > > - > 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] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
Once the mirror is setup and synced to github (24hr window for this potentially to occur) then one of the Github Apache org admins can setup the webhook. The project just needs to put in an infra ticket asking for it -Jake On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Henry Saputra wrote: > HI Marvin, > > The automatic email to dev@ list for github mirror PR, does it happen > for all ASF github mirrors or each podling need to do some setup to > make it work? > > > - Henry > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Marvin Humphrey > wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: > >> How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on > Review > >> Board? > > > > One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. > > > >> If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored > on > >> the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. > > > > It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to > ensure > > that all of its communications are properly archived. > > > > If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I > encourage > > you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also > encourage > > everyone to ponder carefully: > > > > * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing > communications > > in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. > > * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF > Infra > > labor costs. > > > >> There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not > >> mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@ > . > > > > That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does > that[1][2]. > > > >> I would assume that any comment on them should as well. > > > > Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev > lists? > > They are not. > > > > Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and > that > > includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are > properly > > documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of > > archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's > direct > > responsibility. > > > > Marvin Humphrey > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 > > [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx > > > > - > > 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] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
Let's try this again Marvin since you're jumping to the wrong conclusions here. If people are concerned about work on Github not being automatically mirrored to ASF mailing lists that's an Infra problem. They should go talk to them to help get it addressed, which includes the possibility of contributing code. I'm not saying that archiving project relevant discussion is Infra's job. I figured that would be obvious to everyone here, but evidently I'm mistaken. Hopefully this helps to clear that up. Are you really curious as to why I would assume that basic integration with Github would exist when I'm aware of an already existing integration with pull request notifications? When there are hooks that exist for comments being posted to pull requests, I don't think there's a very large leap to assume that we would leverage that. That doesn't mean that I think it's Infra's job to archive for a project. A response like Jake's is exactly the kind of response that this discussion needs. Someone with an understanding of the system explaining exactly what the limitations are. That way, people like me (people who don't bother with the Github mirrors) can better understand exactly what they can do to help improve them in the future if they decide that's what they want to do. Thank you for always being helpful Jake, it's very much appreciated. -- Joyce On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: > > How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on > Review > > Board? > > One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. > > > If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored on > > the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. > > It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to > ensure > that all of its communications are properly archived. > > If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I > encourage > you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also encourage > everyone to ponder carefully: > > * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing communications > in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. > * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF Infra > labor costs. > > > There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not > > mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@ > . > > That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does > that[1][2]. > > > I would assume that any comment on them should as well. > > Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev lists? > They are not. > > Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and that > includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are > properly > documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of > archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's direct > responsibility. > > Marvin Humphrey > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 > [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
On 02/06/2014 07:34 PM, Michael Joyce wrote: > Let's try this again Marvin since you're jumping to the wrong conclusions > here. > > If people are concerned about work on Github not being automatically > mirrored to ASF mailing lists that's an Infra problem. They should go talk > to them to help get it addressed, which includes the possibility of > contributing code. I'm not saying that archiving project relevant > discussion is Infra's job. Then PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop saying "It's an Infra problem". People are making it seem like the blame is on Infra when $project does something outside the organization and it doesn't get recorded. That responsibility is SOLELY on the project/PMC itself. If however you/they are interested in figuring out how to pull in these off-site/off-org discussions to the mailing lists, then they should talk to Infra and work something out (we _are_ working hard on a solution, for the record). Just stop saying it's an Infra problem - it's a project problem, 100% an issue with the project, but Infra may be able to make convenience archiving for them (I'm stressing *convenience* here, it does not magically make doing all your work on GitHub legit). Having said that, I have yet to see someone step up and tell Infra "Hey, we need your help in doing this, how can we _collaborate_ on a solution?". So...please do. With regards, Daniel. I figured that would be obvious to everyone > here, but evidently I'm mistaken. Hopefully this helps to clear that up. > > Are you really curious as to why I would assume that basic integration with > Github would exist when I'm aware of an already existing integration with > pull request notifications? When there are hooks that exist for comments > being posted to pull requests, I don't think there's a very large leap to > assume that we would leverage that. That doesn't mean that I think it's > Infra's job to archive for a project. > > A response like Jake's is exactly the kind of response that this discussion > needs. Someone with an understanding of the system explaining exactly what > the limitations are. That way, people like me (people who don't bother with > the Github mirrors) can better understand exactly what they can do to help > improve them in the future if they decide that's what they want to do. > Thank you for always being helpful Jake, it's very much appreciated. > > > -- Joyce > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: >>> How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on >> Review >>> Board? >> >> One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. >> >>> If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored on >>> the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. >> >> It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to >> ensure >> that all of its communications are properly archived. >> >> If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I >> encourage >> you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also encourage >> everyone to ponder carefully: >> >> * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing communications >> in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. >> * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF Infra >> labor costs. >> >>> There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not >>> mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@ >> . >> >> That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does >> that[1][2]. >> >>> I would assume that any comment on them should as well. >> >> Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev lists? >> They are not. >> >> Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and that >> includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are >> properly >> documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of >> archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's direct >> responsibility. >> >> Marvin Humphrey >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 >> [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx >> >> - >> 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] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
Matei multiple TLPs using it as their main reviewing system? Outside of JClouds I am unaware of any others using it currently. I think this is a good discussion to have, but we should start another thread with it so as to not hijack the Apache Spark graduation thread with it. -Jake On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Matei Zaharia wrote: > I like the idea of sending these to the dev list. I'm going to open an > INFRA ticket for it. > > While it seems that the current web hook only sends events when a pull > request is opened or closed, GitHub *can* email watchers for comments as > well. I'm watching the project on GitHub and I get an email for every > comment, even on pull requests I never looked at. So maybe we can > investigate adding this to the GitHub hook -- I'm sure it's not a big burden > from their side. > > The other option would be to somehow subscribe dev@ through the standard > GitHub watcher framework by making it the notification address for some > account watching the repo, but this requires confirming the address and I > think anyone on dev might be able to unsubscribe it or take ownership of > that account if we do so. Maybe GitHub can help us do this without going > through the "confirm address" process. Did you guys have a contact over > there helping with the mirroring, or was it all done through their API? I > imagine it's in their interest to make GitHub work with the ASF process > because there are now multiple TLPs using it as their main reviewing system. > > Matei > > On Feb 6, 2014, at 10:13 AM, Jake Farrell wrote: > > > Once the mirror is setup and synced to github (24hr window for this > > potentially to occur) then one of the Github Apache org admins can setup > > the webhook. The project just needs to put in an infra ticket asking for > it > > > > -Jake > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Henry Saputra >wrote: > > > >> HI Marvin, > >> > >> The automatic email to dev@ list for github mirror PR, does it happen > >> for all ASF github mirrors or each podling need to do some setup to > >> make it work? > >> > >> > >> - Henry > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Marvin Humphrey > > >> wrote: > >>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce > wrote: > How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on > >> Review > Board? > >>> > >>> One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. > >>> > If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored > >> on > the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. > >>> > >>> It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to > >> ensure > >>> that all of its communications are properly archived. > >>> > >>> If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I > >> encourage > >>> you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also > >> encourage > >>> everyone to ponder carefully: > >>> > >>> * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing > >> communications > >>>in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. > >>> * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF > >> Infra > >>>labor costs. > >>> > There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm > not > mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail > dev@ > >> . > >>> > >>> That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does > >> that[1][2]. > >>> > I would assume that any comment on them should as well. > >>> > >>> Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev > >> lists? > >>> They are not. > >>> > >>> Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and > >> that > >>> includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are > >> properly > >>> documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of > >>> archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's > >> direct > >>> responsibility. > >>> > >>> Marvin Humphrey > >>> > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 > >>> [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx > >>> > >>> - > >>> 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] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
I agree with Marvin. In addition I find it odd to rely in two sources of truth (and two sets of infrastructure, etc) as far as code goes just so we do code reviews on GitHub. Anybody who wants to commit now needs to have both the Github repo and the Apache repo cloned; you can merge a pull request on GitHub, as that is not authoritative source control. Github will be behind sometimes, etc, etc. What if there are issues with Github (unlikely, I know, but would be out of Apache's control)? Can't we add necessary Apache Infrastructure? Would Apache be able to get a free GitHub license - ala Jira - to run it as part of Apache (or maybe buy a license)? On the Phoenix mailing Gerret was mentioned for git-style code review. -- Lars From: Marvin Humphrey To: "general@incubator.apache.org" Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2014 9:53 AM Subject: Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: > How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on Review > Board? One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. > If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored on > the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to ensure that all of its communications are properly archived. If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I encourage you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also encourage everyone to ponder carefully: * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing communications in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF Infra labor costs. > There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not > mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@. That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does that[1][2]. > I would assume that any comment on them should as well. Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev lists? They are not. Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and that includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are properly documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's direct responsibility. Marvin Humphrey [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
FYI, we have an on-going thread for the git/github discussion here: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201402.mbox/%3CCAEWfVJ%3D_wtDRTNEz4ojvUBf50_VdLDUhiQ15q5rfvFi5eh76uw%40mail.gmail.com%3E For Phoenix, we'll likely mimic what JClouds is doing, but I live Lar's ideas as an improvement. Thanks, James On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 11:04 AM, lars hofhansl wrote: > I agree with Marvin. In addition I find it odd to rely in two sources of > truth (and two sets of infrastructure, etc) as far as code goes just so we > do code reviews on GitHub. > Anybody who wants to commit now needs to have both the Github repo and the > Apache repo cloned; you can merge a pull request on GitHub, as that is not > authoritative source control. > Github will be behind sometimes, etc, etc. > > What if there are issues with Github (unlikely, I know, but would be out > of Apache's control)? > > Can't we add necessary Apache Infrastructure? Would Apache be able to get > a free GitHub license - ala Jira - to run it as part of Apache (or maybe > buy a license)? > On the Phoenix mailing Gerret was mentioned for git-style code review. > > -- Lars > > > > > From: Marvin Humphrey > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" > Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2014 9:53 AM > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: > > How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on > Review > > Board? > > One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. > > > If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored on > > the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. > > It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to > ensure > that all of its communications are properly archived. > > If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I > encourage > you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also encourage > everyone to ponder carefully: > > * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing communications > in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. > * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF Infra > labor costs. > > > There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not > > mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@ > . > > That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does > that[1][2]. > > > I would assume that any comment on them should as well. > > Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev lists? > They are not. > > Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and that > includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are > properly > documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of > archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's direct > responsibility. > > Marvin Humphrey > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 > [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
Jake, yep thanks for suggesting moving this to another thread :) In a few days I plan on tallying the VOTEs from the Spark VOTE thread which at current count is overwhelmingly passing. I'll keep it open through at least Monday and then in time to add it to the agenda for the Feb 2014 meeting of the board for consideration should the current count and trend continue to hold. Thanks to everyone for their thoughtful discussion. Clearly this is a great use case and discussion point for lots of improvement in the ASF, the Incubator, in my own mentorship and others, and in how we can serve our communities best at the ASF. Cheers all. Chris -Original Message- From: Jake Farrell Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org" , "jfarr...@apache.org" Date: Thursday, February 6, 2014 10:58 AM To: Matei Zaharia Cc: "general@incubator.apache.org" , "jfarr...@apache.org" Subject: Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator >Matei >multiple TLPs using it as their main reviewing system? Outside of JClouds >I >am unaware of any others using it currently. > >I think this is a good discussion to have, but we should start another >thread with it so as to not hijack the Apache Spark graduation thread with >it. > >-Jake > > >On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Matei Zaharia >wrote: > >> I like the idea of sending these to the dev list. I'm going to open an >> INFRA ticket for it. >> >> While it seems that the current web hook only sends events when a pull >> request is opened or closed, GitHub *can* email watchers for comments as >> well. I'm watching the project on GitHub and I get an email for every >> comment, even on pull requests I never looked at. So maybe we can >> investigate adding this to the GitHub hook -- I'm sure it's not a big >>burden >> from their side. >> >> The other option would be to somehow subscribe dev@ through the standard >> GitHub watcher framework by making it the notification address for some >> account watching the repo, but this requires confirming the address and >>I >> think anyone on dev might be able to unsubscribe it or take ownership of >> that account if we do so. Maybe GitHub can help us do this without going >> through the "confirm address" process. Did you guys have a contact over >> there helping with the mirroring, or was it all done through their API? >>I >> imagine it's in their interest to make GitHub work with the ASF process >> because there are now multiple TLPs using it as their main reviewing >>system. >> >> Matei >> >> On Feb 6, 2014, at 10:13 AM, Jake Farrell wrote: >> >> > Once the mirror is setup and synced to github (24hr window for this >> > potentially to occur) then one of the Github Apache org admins can >>setup >> > the webhook. The project just needs to put in an infra ticket asking >>for >> it >> > >> > -Jake >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Henry Saputra > >wrote: >> > >> >> HI Marvin, >> >> >> >> The automatic email to dev@ list for github mirror PR, does it happen >> >> for all ASF github mirrors or each podling need to do some setup to >> >> make it work? >> >> >> >> >> >> - Henry >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Marvin Humphrey >>> > >> >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce >> wrote: >> How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review >>on >> >> Review >> Board? >> >>> >> >>> One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. >> >>> >> If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately >>mirrored >> >> on >> the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. >> >>> >> >>> It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails >>to >> >> ensure >> >>> that all of its communications are properly archived. >> >>> >> >>> If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I >> >> encourage >> >>> you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also >> >> encourage >> >>> everyone to ponder carefully: >> >>> >> >>> * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing >> >> communications >> >>>in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. >> >>> * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term >>ASF >> >> Infra >> >>>labor costs. >> >>> >> There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if >>I'm >> not >> mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail >> dev@ >> >> . >> >>> >> >>> That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does >> >> that[1][2]. >> >>> >> I would assume that any comment on them should as well. >> >>> >> >>> Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev >> >> lists? >> >>> They are not. >> >>> >> >>> Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, >>and >> >> that >> >>> includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are >> >> properly >> >>> documented. It is not enough to "assume" t
[IP CLEARANCE] Apache Phoenix, a SQL query engine for Apache HBase
Please check this IP-Clearance form http://incubator.staging.apache.org/ip-clearance/phoenix.html It is for a software grant for Apache Phoenix from Salesforce. Salesforce were the original sponsors of the Phoenix project and have donated the code to ASF. Thanks, St.Ack
Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Apache Phoenix, a SQL query engine for Apache HBase
lgtm. Craig On Feb 6, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Stack wrote: > Please check this IP-Clearance form > > http://incubator.staging.apache.org/ip-clearance/phoenix.html > > It is for a software grant for Apache Phoenix from Salesforce. > > Salesforce were the original sponsors of the Phoenix project and > have donated the code to ASF. > > Thanks, > St.Ack Craig L Russell Architect, Oracle http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@oracle.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
I like the idea of sending these to the dev list. I’m going to open an INFRA ticket for it. While it seems that the current web hook only sends events when a pull request is opened or closed, GitHub *can* email watchers for comments as well. I’m watching the project on GitHub and I get an email for every comment, even on pull requests I never looked at. So maybe we can investigate adding this to the GitHub hook — I’m sure it’s not a big burden from their side. The other option would be to somehow subscribe dev@ through the standard GitHub watcher framework by making it the notification address for some account watching the repo, but this requires confirming the address and I think anyone on dev might be able to unsubscribe it or take ownership of that account if we do so. Maybe GitHub can help us do this without going through the “confirm address” process. Did you guys have a contact over there helping with the mirroring, or was it all done through their API? I imagine it’s in their interest to make GitHub work with the ASF process because there are now multiple TLPs using it as their main reviewing system. Matei On Feb 6, 2014, at 10:13 AM, Jake Farrell wrote: > Once the mirror is setup and synced to github (24hr window for this > potentially to occur) then one of the Github Apache org admins can setup > the webhook. The project just needs to put in an infra ticket asking for it > > -Jake > > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Henry Saputra wrote: > >> HI Marvin, >> >> The automatic email to dev@ list for github mirror PR, does it happen >> for all ASF github mirrors or each podling need to do some setup to >> make it work? >> >> >> - Henry >> >> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Marvin Humphrey >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Michael Joyce wrote: How is doing a review on Github any different than doing a review on >> Review Board? >>> >>> One is captured to Apache controlled channels and the other is not. >>> If there's concern that work on Github isn't being adequately mirrored >> on the mailing lists then that sounds like an Infra problem to me. >>> >>> It's not an Infra problem. It's the problem of any PMC which fails to >> ensure >>> that all of its communications are properly archived. >>> >>> If anyone here is interested in contributing towards this feature, I >> encourage >>> you to subscribe to the infrastructure-dev@apache list. I also >> encourage >>> everyone to ponder carefully: >>> >>> * How to ensure that no information is lost when capturing >> communications >>>in GitHub channels through notifications to our dev lists. >>> * The impact of adding GitHub integration features on long-term ASF >> Infra >>>labor costs. >>> There are plenty of hooks [1] that makes this easy to do and, if I'm not mistaken, pull requests through Github are already supposed to mail dev@ >> . >>> >>> That's right. I've actually worked on the specific hook that does >> that[1][2]. >>> I would assume that any comment on them should as well. >>> >>> Why would you "assume" that GitHub comments are being mailed to dev >> lists? >>> They are not. >>> >>> Every Apache PMC member is tasked with oversight of their project, and >> that >>> includes ensuring that all decisions happen on the dev list and are >> properly >>> documented. It is not enough to "assume" that Infra is taking care of >>> archival -- ensuring that the archival actually happens is the PMC's >> direct >>> responsibility. >>> >>> Marvin Humphrey >>> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4651 >>> [2] Thread on legal-discuss@apache: http://s.apache.org/Nhx >>> >>> - >>> 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] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
> The other option would be to somehow subscribe dev@ through the standard > GitHub watcher framework by making it the notification address jclouds does that for the jclouds-mirror user (which is the one that periodically mirrors the ASF Git repos which are the source of truth to GitHub). See http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jclouds-notifications/201402.mbox/browser We recently decided to send these emails to notifications@ rather than dev@, because, like Matei, all committers are already watching the GitHub repos and end up getting lots of duplicate emails. Subscribers to the dev@ list were also complaining about the signal-to-noise ratio. [1, 2] ap [1] http://markmail.org/message/4s7spzsiyk45upce [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-7213
Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Olingo 1.1.0 incubating (RC03)
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Amend, Christian wrote: > Hi IPMC members, > > Olingo is waiting to get a third vote for our current release candidate. We > would really appreciate if someone could have a look at this. Is it time to enroll Olingo as in our release voting experiment? Or if anyone is opposed, how about some votes? Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Fwd: Regarding the Apache incubator project named Sentry
Begin forwarded message: > From: Shawn McKinney > Date: February 6, 2014 8:47:54 AM PST > To: priv...@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Regarding the Apache incubator project named Sentry > Reply-To: priv...@incubator.apache.org > > Hello, > > This mail is to inform you that we have been using 'Sentry' as the name of > our product for years, as you can check here: > > http://symas.com/products/symas-enforcement-foundry/ > > http://jts.us/products > > http://www.jts.us/iamfortress/javadocs/api-sentry/index.html?overview-summary.html > > http://search.maven.org/#search%7Cgav%7C1%7Cg%3A%22us.joshuatreesoftware%22%20AND%20a%3A%22sentry%22 > > The Sentry name has been used by joshuatreesoftware, symas, and subsequently > released as an open source product by the openldap foundation for over two > years. We believe using the same name for a product that does roughly the > same thing (role-based authorization) would be confusing and dilute the value > of both products. > > Thanks in advance for your cooperation, > > Shawn McKinney > -- > 650-963-7681 smckin...@symas.com Craig L Russell Architect, Oracle http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@oracle.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
> > Hope this helps to ease your concern about Spark podling readiness to > become TLP. > I am a bit conflicted. Part of me is inclined to join Craig, Sebb, and Bertand and issue a -1. At the same time, there exist many +1s here from folks that I respect and trust, including the mentors of the podling; and I think they are far better placed than me to judge the true state of the podling. The part that disturbs me is that after the vote passed in the community, and came to the IPMC a mentor is still having to remind folks that things like strategy and roadmap discussions need to happen on the mailing list. That's a pretty foundational concept in my mind for an Apache project. The missing account issues are somewhat troubling, but also not really within the purview of the podling to fix either; though I find it odd that people committed to the podling (and many initial committers) haven't asked for their Apache account or needed to use it. Love to hear opinions, even if they are stating that I am meddling or crazy :) --David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[VOTE] Graduation of Apache Knox from the Incubator
Hi Everyone, The Apache Knox Incubating podling has VOTEd to graduate from the Incubator. The community VOTE has passed below with the provided tallies. The graduation resolution draft is pasted below. We welcome your VOTE'ing on Knox's graduation from the Incubator. I will leave this VOTE open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Recommend graduation of Apache Knox from the Incubator. [ ] +0 Don't care. [ ] -1 Don't recommend graduation of Apache Knox from the Incubator because.. Thanks for your VOTE! Cheers, Chris -Original Message- From: Chris Mattmann Reply-To: "d...@knox.incubator.apache.org" Date: Thursday, February 6, 2014 8:38 PM To: "d...@knox.incubator.apache.org" Subject: [RESULT] [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Knox from the Incubator >Hi Guys, > > >Sorry it took forever for me to close this VOTE! :) > >Here are the tallies: > >+1 > >Chris Mattmann* >Alan Gates* >Larry McCay >Dilli Arumugam >Kevin Minder > >* - indicates IPMC > >This VOTE has passed. I'll now take it to general@incubator.apache.org. > >Thanks for VOTE'ing! > >Cheers, >Chris > >-Original Message- >From: Chris Mattmann >Reply-To: "d...@knox.incubator.apache.org" >Date: Thursday, December 19, 2013 2:41 PM >To: "d...@knox.incubator.apache.org" >Subject: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Knox from the Incubator > >>Hi Folks, >> >> >>Time to VOTE on the following resolution to graduate >>Apache Knox from the Apache Incubator. Here's a draft >>resolution to VOTE on (with Kevin listed as PMC chair). >> >>I'll leave the VOTE open for the next week. If all goes >>well here, I'll take it to general@incubator.a.o and if >>all goes well there, we'll take it to the Apache board >>for consideration in their January 2014 board meeting. >> >>Thanks! >> >>[ ] +1 Graduate Apache Knox from the Incubator >>[ ] +0 Don't care. >>[ ] -1 Don't graduate Apache Knox from the Incubator because.. >> >>Thanks and here's my enthusiastic +1! >> >>Cheers, >>Chris >> >>--draft 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, for distribution at no charge to the >> public, related to secure access for Apache Hadoop clusters. >> >> NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management >> Committee (PMC), to be known as the "Apache Knox Project" be >> and hereby is established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; >> and be it further >> >> RESOLVED, that the Apache Knox Project be and hereby is >> responsible for the creation and maintenance of software >> related to secure access for Apache Hadoop clusters; and be it further >> >> RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache Knox", be >> and hereby is created, the person holding such office to serve >> at the direction of the Board of Directors as the chair of the >> Apache Knox Project, and to have primary responsibility for >>management of the projects within the scope of responsibility >> of the Apache Knox Project; 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 Knox Project: >> >>* Christopher Douglas >>* Chris Mattmann >>* Devaraj Das >>* Dilli Dorai >>* Alan Gates >>* John Speidelkminder >>* Kevin Minder >>* Larry McCay >>* Mahadev Konar >>* Owen O'Malley >>* Sumit Mohanty >>* Tom Beerbower >>* Thomas White >>* Venkatesh Seetharam >> >>NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Kevin Minder be >> appointed to the office of Vice President, Apache Knox, >>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 the Apache Knox Project be and hereby is >> tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache >> Incubator Knox podling; and be it further >> >> RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache >> Incubator Knox podling encumbered upon the Apache >>Incubator Project are hereafter discharged. >> >> >> >> >> > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
Hey All - chiming in as an active Spark committer. > The part that disturbs me is that after the vote passed in the > community, and came to the IPMC a mentor is still having to remind > folks that things like strategy and roadmap discussions need to happen > on the mailing list. That's a pretty foundational concept in my mind > for an Apache project. Henry gave a reminder on the mailing list not because it's a persistent problem but because it never explicitly came up prior to this. We use github for review comments and in one case this week there was a brief discussion that could be interpreted as roadmap - so Henry just gave a reminder not to do that. I can't imagine why any project would *want* to use github review comments for long term roadmap discussion... it's a terrible medium for that anyways! We have a very active developer list and that is where these discussions take place. > The missing account issues are somewhat troubling, but also not really > within the purview of the podling to fix either; though I find it odd > that people committed to the podling (and many initial committers) > haven't asked for their Apache account or needed to use it. This is because those people have still contributed a lot of code via other commiters who merge so it's not an immediate urgency. For perspective I am a committer on two other ASF projects but I've never personally committed code to either - I do it through the more active committers who basically spend all their time merging patches. A few of the initial commiters are not currently active on the project; they've made major contributions over the last few years of development and are committers in recognition of those contributions (see above). Popping up a level. We are happy to have github discussions forward to either our dev- list or a reviews- list or something like that (I beleive Matei is setting that up now). If IPCM folks want to debate whether we should *have* to do that, it seems sensible to fork a thread and discuss elsewhere. If IPMC folks want to debate whether github should be allowed at all, I also think it's better discussed outside of this graduation thread. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
+1 (binding) These wrinkles are not as big as they appear. For instance, the issue with some committers not noticing that their accounts were live is actually due to a better submission and review process than most tlp's exhibit. The spark community has more of the apache spirit in it than most incubator projects lately. Notably they also take feedback about how to tune their processes very well. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 7, 2014, at 4:05, David Nalley wrote: >> >> Hope this helps to ease your concern about Spark podling readiness to >> become TLP. > > > I am a bit conflicted. Part of me is inclined to join Craig, Sebb, and > Bertand and issue a -1. At the same time, there exist many +1s here > from folks that I respect and trust, including the mentors of the > podling; and I think they are far better placed than me to judge the > true state of the podling. > > The part that disturbs me is that after the vote passed in the > community, and came to the IPMC a mentor is still having to remind > folks that things like strategy and roadmap discussions need to happen > on the mailing list. That's a pretty foundational concept in my mind > for an Apache project. > > The missing account issues are somewhat troubling, but also not really > within the purview of the podling to fix either; though I find it odd > that people committed to the podling (and many initial committers) > haven't asked for their Apache account or needed to use it. > > Love to hear opinions, even if they are stating that I am meddling or crazy :) > > --David > > - > 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] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
HI David Nalley, Thank you for your comment and concern, really appreciate it. As Patrick had mentioned in his reply, this is not a persistent problem. The reminder I sent was about particular topic which could be interpreted as design or roadmap topic rather than review for a patch. Rather than reminding an individual or two involved in the discussion, I decided to send email to dev@ list to show by example the open and transparent discussions the ASF way. Hope this gives some more clarification about the state of the podling embracing the ASF way. - Henry On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 9:19 PM, Patrick Wendell wrote: > Hey All - chiming in as an active Spark committer. > >> The part that disturbs me is that after the vote passed in the >> community, and came to the IPMC a mentor is still having to remind >> folks that things like strategy and roadmap discussions need to happen >> on the mailing list. That's a pretty foundational concept in my mind >> for an Apache project. > > Henry gave a reminder on the mailing list not because it's a > persistent problem but because it never explicitly came up prior to > this. We use github for review comments and in one case this week > there was a brief discussion that could be interpreted as roadmap - so > Henry just gave a reminder not to do that. I can't imagine why any > project would *want* to use github review comments for long term > roadmap discussion... it's a terrible medium for that anyways! We have > a very active developer list and that is where these discussions take > place. > >> The missing account issues are somewhat troubling, but also not really >> within the purview of the podling to fix either; though I find it odd >> that people committed to the podling (and many initial committers) >> haven't asked for their Apache account or needed to use it. > > This is because those people have still contributed a lot of code via > other commiters who merge so it's not an immediate urgency. For > perspective I am a committer on two other ASF projects but I've never > personally committed code to either - I do it through the more active > committers who basically spend all their time merging patches. A few > of the initial commiters are not currently active on the project; > they've made major contributions over the last few years of > development and are committers in recognition of those contributions > (see above). > > Popping up a level. We are happy to have github discussions forward to > either our dev- list or a reviews- list or something like that (I > beleive Matei is setting that up now). If IPCM folks want to debate > whether we should *have* to do that, it seems sensible to fork a > thread and discuss elsewhere. If IPMC folks want to debate whether > github should be allowed at all, I also think it's better discussed > outside of this graduation thread. > > - > 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] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
On Thu, Feb 6, 2014 at 7:05 PM, David Nalley wrote: > The part that disturbs me is that after the vote passed in the > community, and came to the IPMC a mentor is still having to remind > folks that things like strategy and roadmap discussions need to happen > on the mailing list. That's a pretty foundational concept in my mind > for an Apache project. Thanks for your thoughtful, constructive commentary, David. The issue of GitHub integration is complex, unresolved, and as today's thread demonstrates, controversial. I considered voting -1 because I don't want to hand a hot potato to the Board. However, as you note Spark comes highly recommended, and I am impressed by what I've seen on general@incubator, especially today and in the thread on dealing with binaries in their 0.8 release. I believe that Spark is likely to play a highly constructive role in realizing the promise of integrating the "Community over Code" ASF with "Social Coding" GitHub. +1 (binding) to graduate. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Change of IPMC Chair
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:02 AM, Marvin Humphrey > wrote: >> ...Congratulations to Roman Shaposhnik! The Incubator PMC has voted to >> recommend Roman as our next Chair in a resolution to the Board next >> week > > Cautious congrats here, as the board still has to accept this > recommendation. > > I don't see a reason why it would not accept it, but it's not effective > until that happens. You know, I thought about this before posting then went ahead anyway. I suppose that in the future, best practice -- for any project -- would be to hold off on announcing a chair change until after the Board approves the resolution. Similar to inviting new PMC members only after the NOTICE period expires. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
+1 (binding) Fully agree with Ted's view on the Spark community. On 02/07/2014 06:32 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: +1 (binding) These wrinkles are not as big as they appear. For instance, the issue with some committers not noticing that their accounts were live is actually due to a better submission and review process than most tlp's exhibit. The spark community has more of the apache spirit in it than most incubator projects lately. Notably they also take feedback about how to tune their processes very well. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 7, 2014, at 4:05, David Nalley wrote: Hope this helps to ease your concern about Spark podling readiness to become TLP. I am a bit conflicted. Part of me is inclined to join Craig, Sebb, and Bertand and issue a -1. At the same time, there exist many +1s here from folks that I respect and trust, including the mentors of the podling; and I think they are far better placed than me to judge the true state of the podling. The part that disturbs me is that after the vote passed in the community, and came to the IPMC a mentor is still having to remind folks that things like strategy and roadmap discussions need to happen on the mailing list. That's a pretty foundational concept in my mind for an Apache project. The missing account issues are somewhat troubling, but also not really within the purview of the podling to fix either; though I find it odd that people committed to the podling (and many initial committers) haven't asked for their Apache account or needed to use it. Love to hear opinions, even if they are stating that I am meddling or crazy :) --David - 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] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
+1 (binding) --Andrew On 2/6/14 10:51 PM, Sebastian Schelter wrote: +1 (binding) Fully agree with Ted's view on the Spark community. On 02/07/2014 06:32 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: +1 (binding) These wrinkles are not as big as they appear. For instance, the issue with some committers not noticing that their accounts were live is actually due to a better submission and review process than most tlp's exhibit. The spark community has more of the apache spirit in it than most incubator projects lately. Notably they also take feedback about how to tune their processes very well. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 7, 2014, at 4:05, David Nalley wrote: Hope this helps to ease your concern about Spark podling readiness to become TLP. I am a bit conflicted. Part of me is inclined to join Craig, Sebb, and Bertand and issue a -1. At the same time, there exist many +1s here from folks that I respect and trust, including the mentors of the podling; and I think they are far better placed than me to judge the true state of the podling. The part that disturbs me is that after the vote passed in the community, and came to the IPMC a mentor is still having to remind folks that things like strategy and roadmap discussions need to happen on the mailing list. That's a pretty foundational concept in my mind for an Apache project. The missing account issues are somewhat troubling, but also not really within the purview of the podling to fix either; though I find it odd that people committed to the podling (and many initial committers) haven't asked for their Apache account or needed to use it. Love to hear opinions, even if they are stating that I am meddling or crazy :) --David - 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 -- Andrew F. Hart http://people.apache.org/~ahart - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Graduation of Apache Spark from the Incubator
I agree with Ted that these minor issues can be ironed out especially if the community is open to constructive criticism as these folks are. IMHO the health of the community is much more important than minor insignificant shortcomings. Social development is changing many things and causing incongruities in the way we're used to working: we need to adapt to them instead of penalizing podlings. Many projects even years after graduation stumble occasionally but eventually find their way. With that said I also hope some of the mentors continue on with the community's PMC after graduation. +1 (binding) -Alex On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 9:08 AM, Andrew Hart wrote: > +1 (binding) > > --Andrew > > On 2/6/14 10:51 PM, Sebastian Schelter wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> Fully agree with Ted's view on the Spark community. >> >> On 02/07/2014 06:32 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: >> >>> +1 (binding) >>> >>> These wrinkles are not as big as they appear. For instance, the issue >>> with some committers not noticing that their accounts were live is actually >>> due to a better submission and review process than most tlp's exhibit. >>> >>> The spark community has more of the apache spirit in it than most >>> incubator projects lately. Notably they also take feedback about how to >>> tune their processes very well. >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Feb 7, 2014, at 4:05, David Nalley wrote: >>> >>> > Hope this helps to ease your concern about Spark podling readiness to > become TLP. > I am a bit conflicted. Part of me is inclined to join Craig, Sebb, and Bertand and issue a -1. At the same time, there exist many +1s here from folks that I respect and trust, including the mentors of the podling; and I think they are far better placed than me to judge the true state of the podling. The part that disturbs me is that after the vote passed in the community, and came to the IPMC a mentor is still having to remind folks that things like strategy and roadmap discussions need to happen on the mailing list. That's a pretty foundational concept in my mind for an Apache project. The missing account issues are somewhat troubling, but also not really within the purview of the podling to fix either; though I find it odd that people committed to the podling (and many initial committers) haven't asked for their Apache account or needed to use it. Love to hear opinions, even if they are stating that I am meddling or crazy :) --David - 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 >> >> > > -- > Andrew F. Hart > http://people.apache.org/~ahart > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > -- Best Regards, -- Alex
