Re: What is "The Apache Way"?

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

Hi Marvin,

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 9:28 PM, Marvin Humphrey  wrote:
> a "maturity model" initiative ()
> close in spirit to Shane's work on project requirements .  Drawing on
> resources like Bertrand and Shane, I am confident that we can hammer out a
> top-level requirements document which would be complete, authentic enough to
> satisfy Jim, yet spartan enough to satisfy skeptics like Doug.
>
> ...If the Board is willing to commission such a document, I will make it 
> happen...

As others have said, consider yourself commissioned!

My current thinking is that we should have an Apache Way page under
http://apache.org/dev/ with minimal text, mostly links to basic
principles (bylaws, maturity model etc), policies (trademarks,
releases, infra etc) and oral tradition (slides, talks, blog posts
etc).

I suggest working on this on the dev@community.a.o and if you can lead
that that's fantastic.

-Bertrand

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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Usergrid 1.0.1 (incubating) RC5

[Dave]

+1 (binding)

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:02 PM, John D. Ament 
wrote:

> +1 binding (from dev @ list)
>
> On Mon Jan 12 2015 at 3:09:10 PM Dave  wrote:
>
> > The Apache Usergrid PPMC has address the issues found in our earlier
> > release candidate and has voted to release Apache Usergrid 1.0.1 based on
> > RC5.
> >
> > Here is the vote thread:
> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-
> > usergrid-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAF1aazDWk_MgBaYKL4RR55TTbabdxt_
> > 3FhfEKAAYfLGqKAQFKw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > Below is the release info and links to the RC5 release files.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I propose that we accept the following release candidate as the
> > official Apache Usergrid 1.0.1 release.
> >
> > Usergrid 1.0.1-rc5 includes the following:
> > ---
> > The CHANGELOG for the release is available
> > at:https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-
> > usergrid.git&f=CHANGELOG&hb=1.0.1-rc5
> >
> > The branch used to create the release candidate
> > is:https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-
> > usergrid.git&hb=1.0.1-rc5
> >
> > The current Git commit ID is 867c6dd6f229f929f4528aa5677ee346a70f620d
> >
> > The release candidate is available
> > at:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/
> > usergrid/1.0.1-rc5/apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz
> >
> > The MD5 checksum of the release candidate can be found
> > at:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/
> > usergrid/1.0.1-rc5/apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz.md5
> >
> > The signature of the release candidate can be found
> > at:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/
> > usergrid/1.0.1-rc5/apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz.asc
> >
> > The GPG key used to sign the release are available
> > at:https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/usergrid/KEYS
> >
> > Please download, verify, and test.
> >
> > The vote will close on Sun Jan 11 21:22:33 EST 2015
> >
> > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Usergrid 1.0.1
> > [ ] +0
> > [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Usergrid 1.0.1 because...
> >
>

Re: What is "The Apache Way"?

[Rich Bowen]

On 01/13/2015 03:28 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:

I would pour my heart and soul into such a role.  I would give everything I
have to coordinate the delivery of minimalist authoritative documentation
worthy of Apache's traditions.  It would be a huge contribution to open source
software, lightening the load for hundreds of projects and thousands of
developers.



...



Please assign me this task.


Yes, with all of my various hats, I heartily endorse this task. You're 
right, this would be of great value both inside and outside of Apache.



--
Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon

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

[RESULT][VOTE] Incubate TinkerPop: A Graph Computing Framework

[Marko Rodriguez]

Hello,

I would like to thank Apache on behalf of TinkerPop for allowing us to propose 
our project and providing us mentors able to bring the TinkerPop Proposal to a 
successful voting conclusion. Our mentor Hadrian asked me to tally the votes, 
so here goes:

+ 1 (6 votes)
+ 0 (1 vote)
- 1 (0 votes)

With that, I would like to pat ourselves on the back for a job well done. Our 
intention is to start to the migration process from TinkerPop infrastructure to 
Apache infrastructure on Tuesday January 20th.

Thank you everyone,
Marko.

http://tinkerpop.com


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Usergrid 1.0.1 (incubating) RC5

[Stian Soiland-Reyes]

0 from me (non-binding)


+0 because:
- wrong commit id in vote email
- *.md5 not in regular md5sum format

Verified:
- GPG signature / KEYS
- MD5 (manually, see below).
- SHA
- dist matches git (but wrong commit id in vote)
- cd stack ; mvn clean install -DskipTests=true
- Apache file headers
- Licenses

(Not a blocker) Could you use a regular md5sum file?

stain@biggie-utopic:~/src/incubator-usergrid$ cat
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz.md5
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz:
43 64 45 6F 9F 1A DA 9C  DA 52 89 67 10 27 9B 7F

stain@biggie-utopic:~/src/incubator-usergrid$ md5sum -c
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz.md5
md5sum: apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz.md5: no properly
formatted MD5 checksum lines found

A regular file would look like the output of md5:

stain@biggie-utopic:~/src/incubator-usergrid$ md5sum
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz
4364456f9f1ada9cda52896710279b7f
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz

stain@biggie-utopic:~/src/incubator-usergrid$ md5sum
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz >
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz.md5

stain@biggie-utopic:~/src/incubator-usergrid$ md5sum -c
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz.md5
apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz: OK


(FYI - The second .sha hash, which you didn't link to, works fine with shasum -c
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/usergrid/1.0.1-rc5/apache-usergrid-1.0.1-rc5-incubating.tar.gz.sha
)


(Not a blocker - as difference is minimal this time)

https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-usergrid.git&hb=1.0.1-rc5

does not match

> The current Git commit ID is 867c6dd6f229f929f4528aa5677ee346a70f620d

which is diverged from the branch 1.0.1-rc5 at
6148e4e6186e67cae53bd874bdc6f9470351faab

I don't know which of these we are voting over - presumably it should
rather be the second one?


stain@biggie-utopic:~/src/incubator-usergrid$ git show 1.0.1-rc5
commit 6148e4e6186e67cae53bd874bdc6f9470351faab
Author: Dave Johnson 
Date:   Thu Jan 8 21:21:33 2015 -0500

   Updating .usergridversion to 1.0.1-rc5.

6148e4.. matches the tar.gz content.

To be fair, the difference is minimal and probably not important:

stain@biggie-utopic:~/src/incubator-usergrid$ git diff
867c6dd6f229f929f4528aa5677ee346a70f620d
6148e4e6186e67cae53bd874bdc6f9470351faab
diff --git a/.usergridversion b/.usergridversion
index 276823b..132493d 100644
--- a/.usergridversion
+++ b/.usergridversion
@@ -1 +1 @@
-1.0.2-SNAPSHOT
+1.0.1-rc5




(Not a blocker) Is this license kosher with Apache? (log from
license-maven-plugin)

 (Apple License) AppleJavaExtensions
(com.apple:AppleJavaExtensions:1.4 -
http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#samplecode/AppleJavaExtensions/Introduction/Intro.html)

https://developer.apple.com/legacy/library/samplecode/AppleJavaExtensions/Listings/README_txt.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/DTS1677-README_txt-DontLinkElementID_4

Might need to go into NOTICE if you later do a binary release (but OK
as your vote is only a source code release).






Not a blocker (as your readme says to use -DskipTests=true) :

With Open JDK8 build fails for "mvn clean install":

Tests in error:
  HectorLockManagerIT.org.apache.usergrid.locking.cassandra.HectorLockManagerIT
» Runtime
  SchedulerRuntime2IT>AbstractSchedulerRuntimeIT.setup:54 » Runtime
org.springfr...
  SchedulerRuntime4IT>AbstractSchedulerRuntimeIT.setup:54 » Runtime
org.springfr...
  SchedulerRuntimeIntervalIT>AbstractSchedulerRuntimeIT.setup:54 »
Runtime org.s...
  SchedulerRuntime7IT>AbstractSchedulerRuntimeIT.setup:54 » Runtime
org.springfr...
  SchedulerRuntime5IT>AbstractSchedulerRuntimeIT.setup:54 » Runtime
org.springfr...
  SchedulerRuntime6IT>AbstractSchedulerRuntimeIT.setup:54 » Runtime
org.springfr...
  SchedulerRuntime3IT>AbstractSchedulerRuntimeIT.setup:54 » Runtime
org.springfr...
  SchedulerRuntime1IT>AbstractSchedulerRuntimeIT.setup:54 » Runtime
org.springfr...
  CountingMutatorIT.org.apache.usergrid.persistence.CountingMutatorIT
» Runtime ...
  ConcurrentCoreITSuite.org.apache.usergrid.ConcurrentCoreITSuite » BeanCreation
  
ConcurrentCoreIteratorITSuite.org.apache.usergrid.ConcurrentCoreIteratorITSuite
» BeanCreation

On 16 January 2015 at 13:16, Dave  wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:02 PM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 binding (from dev @ list)
>>
>> On Mon Jan 12 2015 at 3:09:10 PM Dave  wrote:
>>
>> > The Apache Usergrid PPMC has address the issues found in our earlier
>> > release candidate and has voted to release Apache Usergrid 1.0.1 based on
>> > RC5.
>> >
>> > Here is the vote thread:
>> > https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-
>> > usergrid-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAF1aazDWk_MgBaYKL4RR55TTbabdxt_
>> > 3FhfEKAAYfLGqKAQFKw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>> >
>> > Below is the release info and links to the RC5 release files.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Dave
>> >
>> >
>> > All,
>> >
>> > I propose that w

[pTLP] Apache Commons sub-mailing lists discussion

[Stian Soiland-Reyes]

Relating to IncubatorV2 and pTLP proposals - on Apache Commons I seem
to have spurred a discussion about making sub-mailing lists (And thus
forming sub-communities) - but keep the formalities on the general
list.

(email below)
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3C23d5b03fc1cdb4079ceb52c55458f0e3%40scarlet.be%3E


My slight concern (even though I would benefit from the proposal :))
is that this is in danger of forming a "mini incubator" with less
clear guidance and follow-up:

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAPRnXt%3DDwqk9p-b-yYBYRnrp%3DanvLgdTanMkenLfm6fGQgcHfw%40mail.gmail.com%3E


The pTLP proposal has not mentioned what would be the process for
projects with a sponsor different from Incubator (e.g. which don't
aspire to become TLPs) - presumably they would usually have mentors
from and report to the parent project?


I don't see any proposals with "Apache Commons" as the sponsor at
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/index.html

.. is that because Commons already have a lightweight entry path with
its sandbox?

https://commons.apache.org/sandbox.html



-- Forwarded message --
From: Gilles 
Date: 16 January 2015 at 00:47
Subject: [ALL] Too much traffic on the "dev" ML
To: Commons Developers List 


Hi.

In the discussion that started about RDF, it seems that the
traffic volume is a stumbling block.
[For some time now, it has been a growing nuisance, and the
usual dismissal about filters won't change the fact: Setting
up a filter that will redirect stuff to /dev/null is a waste
of bandwidth.]

If different ML are created, people interested in everything
can subscribe _once_, and nothing will change for them.
For people who spend a lot of time just deleting dozens messages
and notifications a day, it will be a relief.

Maintaining community conversation is not a problem: just
create an "all-...@commons.apache.org" ML for things that
need input form a larger audience (like votes).


Best regards,
Gilles


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

-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating)
http://orcid.org/-0001-9842-9718

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

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Incubate TinkerPop: A Graph Computing Framework

[Luca Garulli]

Very cool, the rating is very very good.

Lvc@


On 16 January 2015 at 15:27, Peter Neubauer  wrote:

> Awesome work Marko and all,
>
> great work and fantastic outcome!
>
> /peter
>
>
> G:  neubauer.peter
> S:  peter.neubauer
> P:  +46 704 106975
> L:   http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer
> T:   @peterneubauer 
>
> Open Data- @mapillary 
> Open Source - @neo4j 
> Open Future  - @coderdojo 
>
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Marko Rodriguez 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I would like to thank Apache on behalf of TinkerPop for allowing us to
>> propose our project and providing us mentors able to bring the TinkerPop
>> Proposal to a successful voting conclusion. Our mentor Hadrian asked me to
>> tally the votes, so here goes:
>>
>> + 1 (6 votes)
>> + 0 (1 vote)
>> - 1 (0 votes)
>>
>> With that, I would like to pat ourselves on the back for a job well done.
>> Our intention is to start to the migration process from TinkerPop
>> infrastructure to Apache infrastructure on Tuesday January 20th.
>>
>> Thank you everyone,
>> Marko.
>>
>> http://tinkerpop.com
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "TinkerPop Contributors" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to tinkerpop-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TinkerPop Contributors" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to tinkerpop-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Incubate TinkerPop: A Graph Computing Framework

[Peter Neubauer]

Awesome work Marko and all,

great work and fantastic outcome!

/peter


G:  neubauer.peter
S:  peter.neubauer
P:  +46 704 106975
L:   http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer
T:   @peterneubauer 

Open Data- @mapillary 
Open Source - @neo4j 
Open Future  - @coderdojo 

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Marko Rodriguez 
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I would like to thank Apache on behalf of TinkerPop for allowing us to
> propose our project and providing us mentors able to bring the TinkerPop
> Proposal to a successful voting conclusion. Our mentor Hadrian asked me to
> tally the votes, so here goes:
>
> + 1 (6 votes)
> + 0 (1 vote)
> - 1 (0 votes)
>
> With that, I would like to pat ourselves on the back for a job well done.
> Our intention is to start to the migration process from TinkerPop
> infrastructure to Apache infrastructure on Tuesday January 20th.
>
> Thank you everyone,
> Marko.
>
> http://tinkerpop.com
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TinkerPop Contributors" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to tinkerpop-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

Re: Graduation question

[Stian Soiland-Reyes]

Will it be updated here that Flink has graduated?

http://incubator.apache.org/projects/index.html
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/flink.html

In particular the "Incubation" checklist is empty.

BTW - I fixed so the missing
http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html re-appeared - missing
quote in the index.xml

..strangely this didn't give any red flags in
http://ci.apache.org/builders/incubator-site-staging.

On 15 December 2014 at 22:07, Alan Gates  wrote:

> I've added the resolution to the board agenda for Wednesday's meeting.
> Thanks Marvin for the guidance.
>
> Alan.
>
>   Marvin Humphrey 
>  December 15, 2014 at 11:20
>
> Short answer: go ahead.
>
> Long answer: There's no role requirement, so in theory literally
> anyone could send an email to board@apache with the resolution text.
> However, it helps if it's someone who's subscribed to board@apache
> (and thus whose messages won't get stuck in moderation) and who has
> sufficient privileges to commit changes to the board agenda in svn.
> In practice, that means that resolutions tend to be submitted by
> Mentors who are also ASF Members subscribed to board@apache.
>
> Marvin Humphrey
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>   Alan Gates 
>  December 15, 2014 at 10:36
>  As a Flink mentor can I submit the graduation resolution to the board now
> that it has passed, or is that a job for Roman as IPMC chair?
>
> Alan.
>
>
> --
> Sent with Postbox 
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>



-- 
Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
http://soiland-reyes.com/stian/work/ http://orcid.org/-0001-9842-9718

Re: [pTLP] Apache Commons sub-mailing lists discussion

[Benson Margulies]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes  wrote:
> Relating to IncubatorV2 and pTLP proposals - on Apache Commons I seem
> to have spurred a discussion about making sub-mailing lists (And thus
> forming sub-communities) - but keep the formalities on the general
> list.
>
> (email below)
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3C23d5b03fc1cdb4079ceb52c55458f0e3%40scarlet.be%3E
>
>
> My slight concern (even though I would benefit from the proposal :))
> is that this is in danger of forming a "mini incubator" with less
> clear guidance and follow-up:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAPRnXt%3DDwqk9p-b-yYBYRnrp%3DanvLgdTanMkenLfm6fGQgcHfw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>
>
> The pTLP proposal has not mentioned what would be the process for
> projects with a sponsor different from Incubator (e.g. which don't
> aspire to become TLPs) - presumably they would usually have mentors
> from and report to the parent project?

Well, the idea of non-incubator sponsors seems to me to have been a
dead letter for years. As of now, the board's expectation is that all
incubating projects are supervised by the IPMC. While the proposal
template still has a slot for sponsor, it does not mean anything in
practice. It's the IPMC and only the IPMC that accepts new projects,
and then supervises them.

In the very remote case that my version of the pTLP proposal goes
anywhere, the board would, of course, have the option of passing a
resolution to establish a pTLP without prior vetting by the Incubator
Committee.

As for subcommunities, I reference the very complex process of a few
years back of _getting rid of_ 'umbrella projects.'

>
>
> I don't see any proposals with "Apache Commons" as the sponsor at
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/index.html
>
> .. is that because Commons already have a lightweight entry path with
> its sandbox?
>
> https://commons.apache.org/sandbox.html
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Gilles 
> Date: 16 January 2015 at 00:47
> Subject: [ALL] Too much traffic on the "dev" ML
> To: Commons Developers List 
>
>
> Hi.
>
> In the discussion that started about RDF, it seems that the
> traffic volume is a stumbling block.
> [For some time now, it has been a growing nuisance, and the
> usual dismissal about filters won't change the fact: Setting
> up a filter that will redirect stuff to /dev/null is a waste
> of bandwidth.]
>
> If different ML are created, people interested in everything
> can subscribe _once_, and nothing will change for them.
> For people who spend a lot of time just deleting dozens messages
> and notifications a day, it will be a relief.
>
> Maintaining community conversation is not a problem: just
> create an "all-...@commons.apache.org" ML for things that
> need input form a larger audience (like votes).
>
>
> Best regards,
> Gilles
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating)
> http://orcid.org/-0001-9842-9718
>
> -
> 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: What is "The Apache Way"?

[Alex Harui]

On 1/16/15, 6:10 AM, "Rich Bowen"  wrote:


>Yes, with all of my various hats, I heartily endorse this task. You're
>right, this would be of great value both inside and outside of Apache.
>

I’m definitely eager to see what Marvin can do here.

I’ve been wondering though: any top-level policy document cannot fully
specify all human behavior.  IMO, that’s why governing bodies have
authority figures who make judgement calls.  The US has a judicial system,
the game of golf has a group of folks who make decisions.  Is it the
various VP’s that get to be the judge?

I’ve often thought about golf when following Apache policy threads.  Golf
has a reasonably detailed rule book but they realize that there are lots
of edge cases in real life and the rule book would be unwieldy if it tried
to specify everything.  So the rule book tries to carefully specify
general principles and is rarely changed.  Then there is a whole archive
of decisions associated with each rule where this group of folks records
decisions made.  Is it reasonable to do something like this at Apache?
Apache Legal seems to already have something like this.  There are legal
policy docs, then the legal-resolved page.

One of the questions I often have when using legal-discuss is whether the
answer I’m getting is authoritative or not.  I know folks are leery about
establishing a tier of folks who can authoritatively make the judgement
calls, but maybe we have to have that so that folks know when they are
getting an official answer vs the opinions of other community members.  To
become a golf rules official you have to pass a test.  And to get on the
board of official golf decision makers is a much harder task.  Maybe we
need a test in order to be an Apache Way Rules Official.

-Alex


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

Re: Final draft of IPMC report for January 2015

[Andrew Purtell]

Thanks for bringing to my attention that I did not sign off on the HTrace
report this month. It was due to an unfortunate busy spell. Since according
to this report it appears I may not be able to adequately mentor HTrace, I
have resigned as mentor from that podling effective immediately.


On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
>  wrote:
> > What does it mean to "didn't sign-off" does it mean they refused to
> sign-off
> >  or that they simply didn't tick a box? Does it mean they didn't even
> read
> > the report or that they didn't tick a box?
>
> It means the box is not ticked off. Think of it as summary of the sections
> that follow.
>
> > I've said it before, I see no value in having a "naughty list" like this.
>
> Whoa, lets not get carried away. This is NOT a naughty list any more
> so that us summarizing the other bits of status for poddlings at the top
> of the report. This information is there already -- we are just making it
> more visible for ease of processing.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

RE: What is "The Apache Way"?

[Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)]

The archive is the mailing list archives and issue trackers.

If an authoritative answer is required then we have VPs who are empowered to 
make operational decisions relating to policy and a Board empowered to make 
community decisions (and oversee the operational side). As you say, we try not 
to have a top down approach, but sometimes it is necessary.

Ross

Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc.
A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation

-Original Message-
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 9:12 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What is "The Apache Way"?



On 1/16/15, 6:10 AM, "Rich Bowen"  wrote:


>Yes, with all of my various hats, I heartily endorse this task. You're 
>right, this would be of great value both inside and outside of Apache.
>

I’m definitely eager to see what Marvin can do here.

I’ve been wondering though: any top-level policy document cannot fully specify 
all human behavior.  IMO, that’s why governing bodies have authority figures 
who make judgement calls.  The US has a judicial system, the game of golf has a 
group of folks who make decisions.  Is it the various VP’s that get to be the 
judge?

I’ve often thought about golf when following Apache policy threads.  Golf has a 
reasonably detailed rule book but they realize that there are lots of edge 
cases in real life and the rule book would be unwieldy if it tried to specify 
everything.  So the rule book tries to carefully specify general principles and 
is rarely changed.  Then there is a whole archive of decisions associated with 
each rule where this group of folks records decisions made.  Is it reasonable 
to do something like this at Apache?
Apache Legal seems to already have something like this.  There are legal policy 
docs, then the legal-resolved page.

One of the questions I often have when using legal-discuss is whether the 
answer I’m getting is authoritative or not.  I know folks are leery about 
establishing a tier of folks who can authoritatively make the judgement calls, 
but maybe we have to have that so that folks know when they are getting an 
official answer vs the opinions of other community members.  To become a golf 
rules official you have to pass a test.  And to get on the board of official 
golf decision makers is a much harder task.  Maybe we need a test in order to 
be an Apache Way Rules Official.

-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: What is "The Apache Way"?

[Marvin Humphrey]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
 wrote:

> My current thinking is that we should have an Apache Way page under
> http://apache.org/dev/ with minimal text, mostly links to basic
> principles (bylaws, maturity model etc), policies (trademarks,
> releases, infra etc) and oral tradition (slides, talks, blog posts
> etc).
>
> I suggest working on this on the dev@community.a.o and if you can lead
> that that's fantastic.

I agree that this is a worthwhile endeavor and I'm happy to add it to
the agenda.

Marvin Humphrey

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

Re: [pTLP] Apache Commons sub-mailing lists discussion

[Stian Soiland-Reyes]

Right - then Incubator guidance really needs updated, because reading
it, it sounds like using the IPMC as a sponsor is a special case for
when you really could not find a sponsor project. Going over the list
of incubating project this hasn't really been the case this decade
except for a couple of clear sub-projects.


http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Process_Description.html even
links to exactly to the umbrella project Jakarta.


I removed the confusing Jakarta reference and have updated it slightly
- see staging:

http://incubator.staging.apache.org/incubation/Process_Description.html

.. but more work is needed as it still describes the process as
normally sending proposals directly to the champion project, where
IPMC submission is a special case. So I agree with you that it is now
the other way around. (Also please remember people won't know jargon
like "IPMC" at this stage..)


I added these paragraphs to help explain what the champion will help
you with before you write and submit a proposal - we found that very
useful for our proposal and for understanding what Apache and "Apache
Way" really would mean for us and our project.


> Simply email that person directly (e.g. usern...@apache.org, see the 
> committer list to find the username), describe informally yourselves and your 
> project, and ask kindly if she would be willing to act as your Champion for 
> your project within the Apache incubator. Remember that all Apache Committers 
> and Members are volunteers with limited spare time, but you will hopefully 
> find that the person is honoured by your request to be a Champion and sees a 
> potential for your project as a future Apache project.

> Once you have found an eligible person who is willing to act as Champion, you 
> can use this person to help you determine if and how your proposal can fit 
> within the ASF, and if the "Apache Way" of open development would be right 
> for your project. This might happen over a series of emails, telephone calls 
> or online chat sessions, and should cover any practical concerns such as 
> project infrastructure (e.g. mailing lists, web, source code repositories, 
> issue tracker, wiki) but also the implications of licensing, governance and 
> Intellectual Property management.



I have not updated from section "Acceptance"  and beyond to make
Incubator as Champion the default.

- any takers? :)

Or should larger parts of Process_Description.html be removed as it is
also covered by the much nicer
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html?  (which on the other
hand doesn't say much about where you find a Champion and Sponsor).


On 16 January 2015 at 16:21, Benson Margulies  wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes  
> wrote:
>> Relating to IncubatorV2 and pTLP proposals - on Apache Commons I seem
>> to have spurred a discussion about making sub-mailing lists (And thus
>> forming sub-communities) - but keep the formalities on the general
>> list.
>>
>> (email below)
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3C23d5b03fc1cdb4079ceb52c55458f0e3%40scarlet.be%3E
>>
>>
>> My slight concern (even though I would benefit from the proposal :))
>> is that this is in danger of forming a "mini incubator" with less
>> clear guidance and follow-up:
>>
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAPRnXt%3DDwqk9p-b-yYBYRnrp%3DanvLgdTanMkenLfm6fGQgcHfw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
>>
>>
>> The pTLP proposal has not mentioned what would be the process for
>> projects with a sponsor different from Incubator (e.g. which don't
>> aspire to become TLPs) - presumably they would usually have mentors
>> from and report to the parent project?
>
> Well, the idea of non-incubator sponsors seems to me to have been a
> dead letter for years. As of now, the board's expectation is that all
> incubating projects are supervised by the IPMC. While the proposal
> template still has a slot for sponsor, it does not mean anything in
> practice. It's the IPMC and only the IPMC that accepts new projects,
> and then supervises them.
>
> In the very remote case that my version of the pTLP proposal goes
> anywhere, the board would, of course, have the option of passing a
> resolution to establish a pTLP without prior vetting by the Incubator
> Committee.
>
> As for subcommunities, I reference the very complex process of a few
> years back of _getting rid of_ 'umbrella projects.'
>
>>
>>
>> I don't see any proposals with "Apache Commons" as the sponsor at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/index.html
>>
>> .. is that because Commons already have a lightweight entry path with
>> its sandbox?
>>
>> https://commons.apache.org/sandbox.html
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Gilles 
>> Date: 16 January 2015 at 00:47
>> Subject: [ALL] Too much traffic on the "dev" ML
>> To: Commons Developers List 
>>
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> In the discussion that started about RDF, it seems that the
>> traffic volume is 

Re: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)

[Alan D. Cabrera]

> On Jan 14, 2015, at 8:48 AM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> at this point we have had a few lively threads
> discussing three somewhat different proposals:
>   #1 mentor re-boot
>   #2 pTLP
>   #3 Ross's strawman http://s.apache.org/8eS
> it feels to me that all three need additional work
> to be done before we can have any reasonable
> consensus around them (let alone voting).
> 
> Wearing my chair hat, I would like to suggest that
> the next step should be: for each proposal we identify
> points that are going to block consensus (AKA would
> result in -1 vote if it comes to a vote). I suggest we
> do it on the wiki pages themselves (I'll wikify Ross's
> proposal tonight). Not editing the wikis but simply
> collecting this feedback as the last section in each
> proposal. The idea would be to identify all such
> points in a week or so.
> 
> Sounds good?

Another, or complementary, way this could be done is to work out the pros and 
cons on a spreadsheet.  This would not take the place of a vote, but would 
provide some useful insight into the opinions that the community has with 
regards to various aspects of each proposal.

http://s.apache.org/reboot 

People who wish to contribute their opinions can send an email to adc at apache 
dot org and I will add them to the list of editors.

There is a Pros tab.  Here people can add columns that represent an 
advantageous aspect that a proposal should cause.  It doesn’t have to apply to 
all, or any, of the existing proposals.  There is no limit to the number of 
advantages aspects added to this tab.  Each row in this spreadsheet, this tab 
specifically, is for each person to indicate using 0-5 how important they feel 
that particular advantageous aspects are to solving the Incubator’s “woes”.

There is a Cons tab. Here people can add columns that represent an 
disadvantageous aspect that a proposal could cause.  It doesn’t have to apply 
to all, or any, of the existing proposals.  There is no limit to the number of 
disadvantageous aspects added to this tab.  Each row in this spreadsheet, this 
tab specifically, is for each person to indicate using 0-5 how relevant they 
feel that particular disadvantageous aspects are to solving the Incubator’s 
“woes”.

The above two tabs will represent what the community thinks are good things and 
bad things to do for the Incubator. 

Then for each proposal there is a corresponding Pros and Cons tab.  These are 
for people to indicate how strongly they feel that certain advantageous or 
disadvantageous aspects apply to specific proposals using 0-5.

All of this data bubbles up to the summary tab.


Regards,
Alan

RE: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)

[Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)]

Or we could just do it

We debated plenty. Three proposals came out of it (two if you look at mine as 
the strawman it was intended to be).

Those proposals are not mutually exclusive.

I say record them in the wiki. Run them for a while. Then compare against the 
problems document we drew up a couple of years back and see how effective they 
are.

Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc.
A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation

-Original Message-
From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:l...@toolazydogs.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 2:52 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)


> On Jan 14, 2015, at 8:48 AM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> at this point we have had a few lively threads discussing three 
> somewhat different proposals:
>   #1 mentor re-boot
>   #2 pTLP
>   #3 Ross's strawman http://s.apache.org/8eS it feels to me that all 
> three need additional work to be done before we can have any 
> reasonable consensus around them (let alone voting).
> 
> Wearing my chair hat, I would like to suggest that the next step 
> should be: for each proposal we identify points that are going to 
> block consensus (AKA would result in -1 vote if it comes to a vote). I 
> suggest we do it on the wiki pages themselves (I'll wikify Ross's 
> proposal tonight). Not editing the wikis but simply collecting this 
> feedback as the last section in each proposal. The idea would be to 
> identify all such points in a week or so.
> 
> Sounds good?

Another, or complementary, way this could be done is to work out the pros and 
cons on a spreadsheet.  This would not take the place of a vote, but would 
provide some useful insight into the opinions that the community has with 
regards to various aspects of each proposal.

http://s.apache.org/reboot 

People who wish to contribute their opinions can send an email to adc at apache 
dot org and I will add them to the list of editors.

There is a Pros tab.  Here people can add columns that represent an 
advantageous aspect that a proposal should cause.  It doesn’t have to apply to 
all, or any, of the existing proposals.  There is no limit to the number of 
advantages aspects added to this tab.  Each row in this spreadsheet, this tab 
specifically, is for each person to indicate using 0-5 how important they feel 
that particular advantageous aspects are to solving the Incubator’s “woes”.

There is a Cons tab. Here people can add columns that represent an 
disadvantageous aspect that a proposal could cause.  It doesn’t have to apply 
to all, or any, of the existing proposals.  There is no limit to the number of 
disadvantageous aspects added to this tab.  Each row in this spreadsheet, this 
tab specifically, is for each person to indicate using 0-5 how relevant they 
feel that particular disadvantageous aspects are to solving the Incubator’s 
“woes”.

The above two tabs will represent what the community thinks are good things and 
bad things to do for the Incubator. 

Then for each proposal there is a corresponding Pros and Cons tab.  These are 
for people to indicate how strongly they feel that certain advantageous or 
disadvantageous aspects apply to specific proposals using 0-5.

All of this data bubbles up to the summary tab.


Regards,
Alan

Re: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)

[Alan D. Cabrera]

> On Jan 16, 2015, at 3:04 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) 
>  wrote:
> 
> Or we could just do it
> 
> We debated plenty. Three proposals came out of it (two if you look at mine as 
> the strawman it was intended to be).
> 
> Those proposals are not mutually exclusive.
> 
> I say record them in the wiki. Run them for a while. Then compare against the 
> problems document we drew up a couple of years back and see how effective 
> they are.

Where is this problems document?


Regards,
Alan

RE: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)

[Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)]

http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorIssues2013

Ross

-Original Message-
From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:l...@toolazydogs.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 3:13 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Next steps for various proposals (mentor re-boot, pTLP, etc.)


> On Jan 16, 2015, at 3:04 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) 
>  wrote:
> 
> Or we could just do it
> 
> We debated plenty. Three proposals came out of it (two if you look at mine as 
> the strawman it was intended to be).
> 
> Those proposals are not mutually exclusive.
> 
> I say record them in the wiki. Run them for a while. Then compare against the 
> problems document we drew up a couple of years back and see how effective 
> they are.

Where is this problems document?


Regards,
Alan


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