Re: Committer Voting and Vetos
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:52 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote: ...The HTTP Server project has successfully operated by unanimity... As a side note, I often tell people that IMO the HTTP Server is so modular because people couldn't agree on things - it's much easier to get consensus and sometimes unanimity when the things to agree upon are smaller ;-) -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Apache Johnzon 0.1-incubating release
Thanks, see comments below On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 1:11 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 28 September 2014 22:31, Hendrik Dev hendrikde...@gmail.com wrote: So the project passed with 6 +1 votes (at least 3 of them binding from Romain Manni-Bucau, Justin Mclean and Daniel Kulp) and no -1 votes. See http://markmail.org/thread/2tnh43qokzj3hiwa and http://markmail.org/thread/g5etfukwi4av6kuk As of now also the incubator vote passed with at least 3 binding votes from Romain Manni-Bucau, Justin Mclean and Mark Struberg and no -1 votes (until now). We would like to ask the IPMC and incubator people to review the release within the next 72 hours and if we get no -1 votes then the vote passed. Thanks Hendrik On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Hendrik Dev hendrikde...@gmail.com wrote: I've created a 0.1-incubating release candidate, with the following artifacts up for a project vote: Git tag for the release is https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-johnzon.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v0.1-incubating Git tags are not immutable Please include the hash for the tag in vote e-mails, both for the reviewers and for the historical record. commit hash 39ffe71fc0050d5f25baec334e955d27e850bd6f https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-johnzon.git;a=commit;h=39ffe71fc0050d5f25baec334e955d27e850bd6f Maven staging repo: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejohnzon-1000/ Source release: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejohnzon-1000/org/apache/johnzon/johnzon/0.1-incubating/johnzon-0.1-incubating-source-release.zip The NOTICE file contains the following text: Please see LICENSE for additional copyright and licensing information. This is not required, and should be removed. (not a blocker for this release) The KEYS file does not really belong in the source release. The KEYS file has to be available from the ASF mirror host (*) This is derived from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/johnzon/ so the canonical source for KEYS should be maintained there, not in the source repo. The Git copy should be dropped (after merging any missing keys) Not a blocker. will change this for the next release PGP release keys (signed using 22D7F6EC): http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/johnzon/KEYS (*) this is the file which is published to consumers so they can check sigs The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 approve [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) Here is my +1 (non binding) Thanks Hendrik -- Hendrik Saly (salyh, hendrikdev22) @hendrikdev22 PGP: 0x22D7F6EC - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Hendrik Saly (salyh, hendrikdev22) @hendrikdev22 PGP: 0x22D7F6EC - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Committer Voting and Vetos
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Noah Slater nsla...@apache.org wrote: ... Specifically, we (CouchDB) see voting as the failure mode of a discussion (a useful one non-the-less), or as a last-step requirement to officiate a particular set of project-level decisions (that are fully enumerated in the bylaws). I very much agree with this sentiment, as does the Apache Subversion project. In the project's 14 year history, we have held (maybe) about FOUR actual votes. EVER. And I'm talking both technical and community-issue votes. I'm really kind of guessing here. I can recall only two, but there must have been a few others. If a community cannot reach consensus, and needs a vote instead, then something is wrong (IMO). To the concrete question, the Subversion project never calls a strict [VOTE] for new committers or PMC members. We discuss first, and that sets the direction. People throw out +1 messages, but that is sure, make it so rather than a true vote. Whenever somebody says wait a minute, then we do. We don't have formal rules around this stuff, since a general goal of consensus is so ingrained into the community. Cheers, -g
Re: Committer Voting and Vetos
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: To the concrete question, the Subversion project never calls a strict [VOTE] for new committers or PMC members. We discuss first, and that sets the direction. People throw out +1 messages, but that is sure, make it so rather than a true vote. Whenever somebody says wait a minute, then we do. We don't have formal rules around this stuff, since a general goal of consensus is so ingrained into the community. The nice thing about the vote is that there is a [RESULT] message to link to. What does the Subversion project link to in the account request?
Re: FW: [Proposal] Taverna workflow
Hi Devs, Apache Airavata http://airavata.apache.org/ is a software framework for executing and managing computational jobs and workflows on distributed computing resources. Taverna's concern is not as much job coordination, but more of a data flow between services. Airavata's XBaya Workflow Suite can export workflows in Taverna 1 format SCUFL, but could be updated to work with Taverna 3's SCUFL2 format. I am a committer of Apache Airavata project and interesting to contribute for Airavata-SCUFL2 integrations. I already have started a mail [1] thread in apache Airavata architecture mailing list to explore the next generation workflow description language for Airavata which best support and suit for Scientific domains. [1] http://markmail.org/thread/tkpbj3sr4jhg6o6z Thanks, Shameera.
Re: Committer Voting and Vetos
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: To the concrete question, the Subversion project never calls a strict [VOTE] for new committers or PMC members. We discuss first, and that sets the direction. People throw out +1 messages, but that is sure, make it so rather than a true vote. Whenever somebody says wait a minute, then we do. We don't have formal rules around this stuff, since a general goal of consensus is so ingrained into the community. The nice thing about the vote is that there is a [RESULT] message to link to. What does the Subversion project link to in the account request? We don't provide a link. There is no reason for Infrastructure to second-guess account requests from Officers or ASF Members, so that link is optional. *Should* a question ever arise, then it is easy enough to provide background information. Cheers, -g
Re: [VOTE] Accept Ignite into the Apache Incubator
+1 (binding) On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Konstantin Boudnik c...@apache.org wrote: I would like to call a vote for accepting Apache Ignite for Apache Incubator. The full proposal is available below. We ask the IPMC to sponsor it, with cos as Champion, and stack, rvs, cos, hsaputra and brane volunteering to be Mentors. Please cast your vote: [ ] +1, bring Iginite into Incubator [ ] +0, I don't care either way, [ ] -1, do not bring Iginite into Incubator, because... This vote will be open for 72 hours and only votes from the Incubator PMC are binding. http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IgniteProposal Proposal text from the wiki: ## page was renamed from SilkProposal = Ignite Apache Incubator Proposal = == Abstract == Apache Ignite will be a unified In-Memory Data Fabric providing high-performance, distributed in-memory data management software layer between various data sources and user applications. == Proposal == Apache Ignite is written mostly in Java and Scala with small amount of C++ code and will initially combine the following technologies under one unified umbrella: * In-Memory Data Grid * In-Memory Compute Grid * In-Memory Streaming Processing This unified in-memory fabric will provide high-performance, distributed in-memory software layer that sits in between various data sources and user applica tions. Data sources can include SQL RDBMS, NoSQL, or HDFS. Applications APIs will be available for Java (and Java-based scripting languages), Scala, C++ and .NET (C#). GridGain Systems, Inc. submits this proposal to donate its Apache 2.0-licensed open source project generally known as “GridGain In-Memory Computing Platform”, its source code, documentation, and websites to the Apache Software Foundation (“ASF”) with the goal of extending the vibrant open source community around this technology ultimately governed by “Apache Way”. Proposed Naming We have been advised by the ASF mentors that the name “Ignite” may not be ideal because the name may be too generic and may not pass ASF legal check. Here are the alternatives that we have come up with and any of those will be acceptable for the project pending the ASF legal green light: * Apache Silk (preferable name) * Apache Sylk * Apache Memstor * Apache Ignite == Background Rationale == In-Memory Data Fabric is a natural and evolutionary consolidation of various “in-memory technologies” from the last decade. From simple local caching (JSR-107), to distributed caching, to data grids and databases, to streaming and plug-n-play acceleration - the in-memory space has grown quite dramatically. With rapid advances in NVRAM and significant price reduction of traditional DRAM on one hand, and growing sophistication and demand for faster data processing on another - many users of these silo-ed technologies and products started to look for a “strategic approach” to in-memory - an in-memory data fabric - that would provide suitable APIs for different types of payloads: from data caching, to data grids, to in-memory SQL data stores, to HPC, to streaming processing. With expensive and proprietary in-memory computing products from companies like Oracle, SAP, Microsoft, and IBM - the developers worldwide need an unhindered access to advanced open source in-memory software technology, the technology they can trust to develop with and deploy for critical applications. Current Status Apache Ignite will be based on the technology that is currently developed by GridGain Systems and available under Apache 2.0 license (http://www.gridgain.org). The software has been in development since 2007 and in production since 2009. It is currently used by over 500 production deployments with over 1,000,000 downloads to date, and with over 20,000,000 GridGain nodes started in the last 5 years. == Comparative analysis to relevant projects == === Ignite vs. Spark === Apache Spark is a data-analytic and ML centric system that ingest data from HDFS or another distributed file system and performs in-memory processing of this data. Ignite is an In-Memory Data Fabric that is data source agnostic and provides both Hadoop-like computation engine (MapReduce) as well as many other computing paradigms like MPP, MPI, Streaming processing. Ignite also includes first-class level support for cluster management and operations, cluster-aware messaging and zero-deployment technologies. Ignite also provides support for full ACID transactions spanning memory and optional data sources. Ignite is a broader in-memory system that is less focused on Hadoop. Apache Spark is more inclined towards analytics and ML, and focused on MR-specific payloads. === Ignite vs. Storm, Samza === Apache Storm is streaming processing framework. Apache Samza is a distributed stream processing engine. Ignite is a multi-purpose In-Memory Data Fabric that also includes streaming processing capabilities (and
Re: Committer Voting and Vetos
As an additional reference, here's a previous thread on the topic: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201303.mbox/%3ccapfnckijy6tm5tycfn7msch6h0v_ear7ws5qmftegaoo+do...@mail.gmail.com%3E Cheers, Brett On 26 Sep 2014, at 1:59 pm, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote: In a past discussion about by-laws, some folks were adamant that voting for new committer and PMC members be consensus votes so a single person can block the adding of a candidate. Do any projects use some form of majority voting for new committers? What are the reasons for allowing vetoes? Thanks, -Alex - 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] Accept Ignite into the Apache Incubator
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Konstantin Boudnik c...@apache.org wrote: I would like to call a vote for accepting Apache Ignite for Apache Incubator. The full proposal is available below. We ask the IPMC to sponsor it, with cos as Champion, and stack, rvs, cos, hsaputra and brane volunteering to be Mentors. Please cast your vote: [ ] +1, bring Iginite into Incubator [ ] +0, I don't care either way, [ ] -1, do not bring Iginite into Incubator, because... +1 (binding) Thanks, Roman. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
