Re: [DRAFT] August 2015 Board Report - Please Review
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:31 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org
wrote:
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:10 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com
wrote:
Geode was supposed to report - but its not included in the missing
reports
list.
Hmm very good point. podlings.xml indicates they shouldn't have, but based
on when they entered the incubator they should have. Even going back to
rev 1 of the page, they are missing.
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/August2015?action=recallrev=1
So does anyone have any recommendations on how to handle it? I'll look at
the history to see why they were removed.
I looked at the Geode list after sending my mail and found they were told
they didn't need to report this month as the reminder was sent by mistake.
So I think the only thing to do is ask them to report next month and move
their quarterly schedule.
http://markmail.org/message/3ips25tnmnnczko3
Niall
John
Niall
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:30 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org
wrote:
All,
I'd like to present the draft board report for additional community
input.
We have reports expected from 19 podlings, 12 reported, 7 did not. Of
the
7 that did not report, I left in the shepherd comments on 2 (myself and
Justin Mclean) who had some additional insights on the welfare of the
podlings in question.
There are multiple podlings without mentor sign off - Blur, ODF
Toolkit,
Twill and Sentry. Its not too late to sign off, so if you can get
those
signatures in great. If you cannot, or feel there is an issue with the
report please bring it up and we'll need to move them to non-reporting.
I've copied the current body below.
= Incubator PMC report for August 2015 =
=== Timeline ===
||Wed August 05 ||Podling reports due by end of day ||
||Sun August 09 ||Shepherd reviews due by end of day ||
||Sun August 09 ||Summary due by end of day ||
||Tue August 11 ||Mentor signoff due by end of day ||
||Wed August 12 ||Report submitted to Board ||
||Wed August 19 ||Board meeting ||
=== Shepherd Assignments ===
||Andrei Savu ||AsterixDB ||
||Andrei Savu ||Kylin ||
||Drew Farris ||Blur ||
||John Ament ||Calcite ||
||John Ament ||Droids ||
||Justin Mclean ||BatchEE ||
||Matthew Franklin ||DataFu ||
||Matthew Franklin ||Tamaya ||
||Matthew Franklin ||Twill ||
||P. Taylor Goetz ||FreeMarker ||
||P. Taylor Goetz ||Trafodion ||
||Raphael Bircher ||Sirona ||
||Raphael Bircher ||Slider ||
||Ross Gardler ||Ripple ||
||Suresh Marru ||ODF Toolkit ||
||Suresh Marru ||REEF ||
||Suresh Marru ||TinkerPop ||
||Timothy Chen ||Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer ||
||Timothy Chen ||Kalumet ||
=== Report content ===
{{{
Incubator PMC report for August 2015
The Apache Incubator is the entry path into the ASF for projects and
codebases wishing to become part of the Foundation's efforts.
There are 43 podlings currently under incubation.
* Community
New IPMC members:
Flavio Junquiero
People who left the IPMC:
(none)
* New Podlings
No new podlings entered the incubator this month.
* Graduations
The board has motions for the following:
Ignite
* Releases
The following releases were made since the last Incubator report:
2015-07-27 - apache-brooklyn-0.7.0-incubating
2015-07-24 - Apache-Twill-0.6.0-incubating
2015-07-23 - Apache-Zeppelin-0.5.0-incubating release
2015-07-22 - apache-ripple-emulator-0.9.30-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-ignite-1.3.0-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-samoa-0.3.0-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-kylin-0.7.2-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-tinkerpop-3.0.0-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-usergrid-1.0.2-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-nifi-0.2.0-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-groovy-2.4.4-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-lens-2.2.0-beta-incubating
2015-07-09 - apache-sentry-1.5.1-incubating
2015-07-09 - apache-atlas-0.5-incubating
* IP Clearance
JBoss HornetQ code grant to the ActiveMQ PMC.
* Legal / Trademarks
* Infrastructure
Marvin board report reminders went out this month. There was
much rejoicing.
* Miscellaneous
* Report Manager: John D. Ament
Summary of podling reports
* Still getting started at the Incubator
AsterixDB
Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer
DataFu
FreeMarker
* Not yet ready to graduate
No release:
Blur
Tamaya
Community growth:
Kylin
Trafodion
Twill
* Ready to graduate
Calcite
The Board has motions for the following:
Ignite
* Did not report, expected next month
BatchEE (Shepherd notes remaining)
Droids (Shepherd notes
Re: [DRAFT] August 2015 Board Report - Please Review
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:43 PM Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:31 PM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:10 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: Geode was supposed to report - but its not included in the missing reports list. Hmm very good point. podlings.xml indicates they shouldn't have, but based on when they entered the incubator they should have. Even going back to rev 1 of the page, they are missing. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/August2015?action=recallrev=1 So does anyone have any recommendations on how to handle it? I'll look at the history to see why they were removed. Geode's entry in podlings.xml indicated that they were to be monthly for May, June, July. Therefore, I removed them this month -- and specifically sent an email telling them not to report, since the report reminder had already gone out. Yep, just got to the same conclusion. It happens. For those interested, here's the commit that removed them. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml?r1=1692672r2=1692887pathrev=1695191 and the May report, which includes them as a new podling but no report from them. http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/May2015 It turns out that Geode did not report in May, so they only filed monthly for two months. It's too late for this report cycle. Their next scheduled report will be in October. Agreed. I think the decision to file an out-of-cycle report in September should be left to Geode's Mentors. Agreed, though I would urge their mentors to decide that a special report should be filed in September. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:04 AM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: ...With such tight integration why ask for different JIRAs for the two projects and two different repos?... I don't have a problem with asking for multiple Git repositories but their names should share a common prefix to express that they belong to the same PMC. So instead of incubator-apex.git and incubator-malhar.git I would much prefer incubator-apex-core.git incubator-apex-malhar.git Or something like that, dunno if core makes sense. As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Are tests part of the release?
thanks for your feedback, i canceled the vote, we fixed the deps and startet a new vote. On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:11 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: ...we do not have a demand that a release must contain a test set, so if the release does not contain the test we cannot see it as broken, or ?... From the ASF's point of view you are correct, having tests in a release is not required. OTOH releasing code without tests is...well, suboptimal. But nobody's perfect of course. In Hendrik's case IIUC the tests are present but somewhat broken by depending on Maven snapshots, which makes it a buggy release - but releases are not always perfect either, and I suspect in their case the workaround is easy: release said snapshot and instruct people to replace the appropriate references. That makes it a just a known issue in that release, with a known workaround. -Bertrand - 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: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Incubator Wiki] Update of ConcertedProposal by AtriSharma
On 11 August 2015 at 10:46, Apache Wiki wikidi...@apache.org wrote: Dear Wiki user, You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on Incubator Wiki for change notification. The ConcertedProposal page has been changed by AtriSharma: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ConcertedProposal snip/ = Background = Relational databases were built with the cost of physical memory in mind. The cost is no longer very relevant and physical memory is now available on demand. Another driving factor behind concerted is that it also Also, supporting OLAP workloads with in memory support for faster read constant queries and joins will be useful. Seems to be some missing text and punctuation between also and Also above. concerted should presumably be Concerted snip/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Incubator Wiki] Update of ConcertedProposal by AtriSharma
Fixed, please see and comment. On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Atri Sharma atri.j...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for pointing it out, let me fix. On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:08 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 11 August 2015 at 10:46, Apache Wiki wikidi...@apache.org wrote: Dear Wiki user, You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on Incubator Wiki for change notification. The ConcertedProposal page has been changed by AtriSharma: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ConcertedProposal snip/ = Background = Relational databases were built with the cost of physical memory in mind. The cost is no longer very relevant and physical memory is now available on demand. Another driving factor behind concerted is that it also Also, supporting OLAP workloads with in memory support for faster read constant queries and joins will be useful. Seems to be some missing text and punctuation between also and Also above. concerted should presumably be Concerted snip/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Regards, Atri *l'apprenant* -- Regards, Atri *l'apprenant*
Re: [Incubator Wiki] Update of ConcertedProposal by AtriSharma
Thanks for pointing it out, let me fix. On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:08 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 11 August 2015 at 10:46, Apache Wiki wikidi...@apache.org wrote: Dear Wiki user, You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on Incubator Wiki for change notification. The ConcertedProposal page has been changed by AtriSharma: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ConcertedProposal snip/ = Background = Relational databases were built with the cost of physical memory in mind. The cost is no longer very relevant and physical memory is now available on demand. Another driving factor behind concerted is that it also Also, supporting OLAP workloads with in memory support for faster read constant queries and joins will be useful. Seems to be some missing text and punctuation between also and Also above. concerted should presumably be Concerted snip/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Regards, Atri *l'apprenant*
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
Bertrand, Good point. I will take it up with folks and get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:32 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:04 AM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: ...With such tight integration why ask for different JIRAs for the two projects and two different repos?... I don't have a problem with asking for multiple Git repositories but their names should share a common prefix to express that they belong to the same PMC. So instead of incubator-apex.git and incubator-malhar.git I would much prefer incubator-apex-core.git incubator-apex-malhar.git Or something like that, dunno if core makes sense. As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
Ted, I agree that repo is more critical than jira instance. I am taking up your suggesstion with folks and should get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Incubator Wiki] Update of August2015 by MarkoRodriguez
On Tuesday, August 11, 2015, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 7:19 PM, jan i j...@apache.org javascript:; wrote: On Tuesday, August 11, 2015, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org javascript:; wrote: I would not be so strict with the deadline, as it is does not seem to interfere with the additional work with the report. Jan, you're mistaken. Late reports are a PITA for the Report Manager -- and if you doubt me, please feel free to volunteer as Report Manager for next month. Please do not encourage podlings to report late. I stand corrected, not everything is how it looks. We do not want to life tougher for the report manager, so please strike my comment. Thanks for bringing me back to real life. rgds jan i I think we should accept the reports *despite* the additional work, but please do not encourage late reports. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org javascript:; For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org javascript:; -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
One thing to consider is that release version numbers are tied to specific JIRA projects. If the intention is for Apex and Malhar version numbers to be independent, then using a single JIRA project could introduce some risk of confusion if an Apex version number accidentally gets applied to a Malhar issue. It might necessitate prefixing the version numbers with apex- and malhar- to differentiate. Based on that, I have a slight preference for separate JIRA projects. However, I don't object to using a single unified JIRA project if others feel strongly about it. --Chris Nauroth On 8/11/15, 8:23 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Ted, I agree that repo is more critical than jira instance. I am taking up your suggesstion with folks and should get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - 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: Reform of Incubator
On 04.08.2015 18:12, Joe Brockmeier wrote: What about the Ignite thread was unfortunate? That it was a bit heated at times, or just the fact that there was disagreement? I fear that there's too much bias towards +1'ing things even when folks have legitimate concerns. Heated and disagreement are not a problem. The problem I see are all the people who know nothing about the day-to-day life of the podling, then start stating conditions for their graduation votes that have nothing to do with either published ASF policy or published Incubator guidelines. I'm not going to state names but it's fairly obvious from the archives who I'm talking about. This kind of behaviour not only wastes time but puts mentors in an impossible position: on the one hand, we have to sink a lot of time into guiding the podling (sometimes with a cluebat), and on the other we have to defend the podling and our own integrity from the peanut gallery. No wonder there are never enough active mentors to go around; who in their right mind would want to spend their free time to go through this rigmarole twice? -- Brane - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
Bertrand, We discussed your suggesstion on naming the git repos as follows. There was a consensus on using git repos scoped with apex. incubator-apex-core.git incubator-apex-malhar.git I have changed the names on the wiki as per your suggesstion. I will cover your suggesstion of jira projects name in another reply. Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Bertrand, Good point. I will take it up with folks and get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:32 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:04 AM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: ...With such tight integration why ask for different JIRAs for the two projects and two different repos?... I don't have a problem with asking for multiple Git repositories but their names should share a common prefix to express that they belong to the same PMC. So instead of incubator-apex.git and incubator-malhar.git I would much prefer incubator-apex-core.git incubator-apex-malhar.git Or something like that, dunno if core makes sense. As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
Chris, Thanks for articulating what I was going to respond with after talking to folks here. We indeed see versions for Malhar and Apex differing. We expect Malhar versions to change much more rapidly than Apex. Ted, We discussed the impact of single jira on versioning. For example we expect Malhar X.0.0 to happen much earlier than Apex X.0.0. There was discomfort in naming versions with prefix. The consensus was to have version numbers convey stuff. If folks don't have strong opinion on two jiras, we would prefer to use two jiras. We have taken up Bertrand's scope naming and changed the names of jira projects as follows APX-CORE APX-MLHR I have changed the wiki to reflect the above as jira project names. Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Chris Nauroth cnaur...@hortonworks.com wrote: One thing to consider is that release version numbers are tied to specific JIRA projects. If the intention is for Apex and Malhar version numbers to be independent, then using a single JIRA project could introduce some risk of confusion if an Apex version number accidentally gets applied to a Malhar issue. It might necessitate prefixing the version numbers with apex- and malhar- to differentiate. Based on that, I have a slight preference for separate JIRA projects. However, I don't object to using a single unified JIRA project if others feel strongly about it. --Chris Nauroth On 8/11/15, 8:23 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Ted, I agree that repo is more critical than jira instance. I am taking up your suggesstion with folks and should get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
If there isn’t a char limit on project names in JIRA, wouldn’t it just be better to use “APEX-CORE” and “APEX-MALHAR” to match the actual project names, repos, etc? thanks — Hitesh On Aug 11, 2015, at 1:25 PM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Chris, Thanks for articulating what I was going to respond with after talking to folks here. We indeed see versions for Malhar and Apex differing. We expect Malhar versions to change much more rapidly than Apex. Ted, We discussed the impact of single jira on versioning. For example we expect Malhar X.0.0 to happen much earlier than Apex X.0.0. There was discomfort in naming versions with prefix. The consensus was to have version numbers convey stuff. If folks don't have strong opinion on two jiras, we would prefer to use two jiras. We have taken up Bertrand's scope naming and changed the names of jira projects as follows APX-CORE APX-MLHR I have changed the wiki to reflect the above as jira project names. Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Chris Nauroth cnaur...@hortonworks.com wrote: One thing to consider is that release version numbers are tied to specific JIRA projects. If the intention is for Apex and Malhar version numbers to be independent, then using a single JIRA project could introduce some risk of confusion if an Apex version number accidentally gets applied to a Malhar issue. It might necessitate prefixing the version numbers with apex- and malhar- to differentiate. Based on that, I have a slight preference for separate JIRA projects. However, I don't object to using a single unified JIRA project if others feel strongly about it. --Chris Nauroth On 8/11/15, 8:23 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Ted, I agree that repo is more critical than jira instance. I am taking up your suggesstion with folks and should get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - 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: Reform of Incubator
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Branko Čibej br...@apache.org wrote: On 04.08.2015 18:12, Joe Brockmeier wrote: What about the Ignite thread was unfortunate? That it was a bit heated at times, or just the fact that there was disagreement? I fear that there's too much bias towards +1'ing things even when folks have legitimate concerns. Heated and disagreement are not a problem. The problem I see are all the people who know nothing about the day-to-day life of the podling, then start stating conditions for their graduation votes that have nothing to do with either published ASF policy or published Incubator guidelines. I'm not going to state names but it's fairly obvious from the archives who I'm talking about. This kind of behaviour not only wastes time but puts mentors in an impossible position: on the one hand, we have to sink a lot of time into guiding the podling (sometimes with a cluebat), and on the other we have to defend the podling and our own integrity from the peanut gallery. I can't see what the problem is with the discussion over the Ignite graduation. Seems to me the podling took away some positive actions from that debate and at the end of the day they still graduated. So best of both worlds. Going to a model where only the mentors get to say anything to the podling would mean they would have missed out on that. Its not the Ignites that worry me (because they seemed like a clued up community) - but more projects that are less than proactive about embracing how ASF projects should work combined with mentors that are not so engaged - we could end up with a rubber stamped graduation of a project not working how it should. Niall No wonder there are never enough active mentors to go around; who in their right mind would want to spend their free time to go through this rigmarole twice? -- Brane - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DRAFT] August 2015 Board Report - Please Review
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:31 PM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:10 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: Geode was supposed to report - but its not included in the missing reports list. Hmm very good point. podlings.xml indicates they shouldn't have, but based on when they entered the incubator they should have. Even going back to rev 1 of the page, they are missing. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/August2015?action=recallrev=1 So does anyone have any recommendations on how to handle it? I'll look at the history to see why they were removed. Geode's entry in podlings.xml indicated that they were to be monthly for May, June, July. Therefore, I removed them this month -- and specifically sent an email telling them not to report, since the report reminder had already gone out. It turns out that Geode did not report in May, so they only filed monthly for two months. It's too late for this report cycle. Their next scheduled report will be in October. I think the decision to file an out-of-cycle report in September should be left to Geode's Mentors. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DRAFT] August 2015 Board Report - Please Review
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 1:21 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:13 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:47 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:43 PM Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:31 PM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:10 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: Geode was supposed to report - but its not included in the missing reports list. Hmm very good point. podlings.xml indicates they shouldn't have, but based on when they entered the incubator they should have. Even going back to rev 1 of the page, they are missing. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/August2015?action=recallrev=1 So does anyone have any recommendations on how to handle it? I'll look at the history to see why they were removed. Geode's entry in podlings.xml indicated that they were to be monthly for May, June, July. Therefore, I removed them this month -- and specifically sent an email telling them not to report, since the report reminder had already gone out. Yep, just got to the same conclusion. It happens. For those interested, here's the commit that removed them. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml?r1=1692672r2=1692887pathrev=1695191 and the May report, which includes them as a new podling but no report from them. http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/May2015 It turns out that Geode did not report in May, so they only filed monthly for two months. It's too late for this report cycle. Their next scheduled report will be in October. Agreed. I think the decision to file an out-of-cycle report in September should be left to Geode's Mentors. Agreed, though I would urge their mentors to decide that a special report should be filed in September. I don't agree. If Geode was a TLP the board would have asked them to report the next month - and we should treat them the same way. They're supposed to know when they should report and thats usually the attitude the board expresses to missed reports. Also, the mentors didn't pick up the fact they'd only filed two monthly reports - so I think we (IPMC) should require it. This is a good learning experience :) September is next month, so I'm not sure I understand the conflict here. Is your concern about leaving it up to the mentors? Considering who the mentors are, I doubt they will have any concerns with producing a report for September, considering the circumstances. Yes, I'm disagreeing with leaving up to the mentors. I think we (IPMC) should ask them to file a report in September. Niall Niall Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
oh! We preferred that during our discussion. Somehow we thought there was a limit. I have changed it to full names (APEX-CORE, APEX-MALHAR). If there is a limit we can reduce the number of chars later. wiki is updated. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ApexProposal Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Hitesh Shah hit...@apache.org wrote: If there isn’t a char limit on project names in JIRA, wouldn’t it just be better to use “APEX-CORE” and “APEX-MALHAR” to match the actual project names, repos, etc? thanks — Hitesh On Aug 11, 2015, at 1:25 PM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Chris, Thanks for articulating what I was going to respond with after talking to folks here. We indeed see versions for Malhar and Apex differing. We expect Malhar versions to change much more rapidly than Apex. Ted, We discussed the impact of single jira on versioning. For example we expect Malhar X.0.0 to happen much earlier than Apex X.0.0. There was discomfort in naming versions with prefix. The consensus was to have version numbers convey stuff. If folks don't have strong opinion on two jiras, we would prefer to use two jiras. We have taken up Bertrand's scope naming and changed the names of jira projects as follows APX-CORE APX-MLHR I have changed the wiki to reflect the above as jira project names. Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Chris Nauroth cnaur...@hortonworks.com wrote: One thing to consider is that release version numbers are tied to specific JIRA projects. If the intention is for Apex and Malhar version numbers to be independent, then using a single JIRA project could introduce some risk of confusion if an Apex version number accidentally gets applied to a Malhar issue. It might necessitate prefixing the version numbers with apex- and malhar- to differentiate. Based on that, I have a slight preference for separate JIRA projects. However, I don't object to using a single unified JIRA project if others feel strongly about it. --Chris Nauroth On 8/11/15, 8:23 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Ted, I agree that repo is more critical than jira instance. I am taking up your suggesstion with folks and should get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - 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
[VOTE] Release Apache REEF 0.12.0-incubating (rc2)
The Apache REEF PPMC has voted to release Apache REEF 0.12.0-incubating based on the release candidate described below. Now it is the IPMC's turn to vote. The PPMC vote passed with 5 +1 votes: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-reef-dev/201508.mbox/%3CCABz36OSroQMEtagSiKsWz_L81bf=rd8j5yhratdsoew_g73...@mail.gmail.com%3E The source tar ball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/reef/0.12.0-incubating-rc2/ The Git tag is release-0.12.0-incubating-rc2 The Git commit ID is 13a238d1ba4f1ddca06634773090be79dda0f985 Checksums of apache-reef-0.12.0-incubating-rc2.tar.gz: MD5: 5d74f66220fdb3316f4a50574ef52cd4 SHA512: a5ec246fc5f73427ecb74f4725ce7ac1a8911ee7cf969aa45142b05b4985f385547b9ff47d6752e6c505dbbc98acda762d2fc22f3e2759040e2a7d9a0249398d Release artifacts are signed with the key. The KEYS file is available here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/reef/KEYS Issues Resolved in the release 177 issues were closed/resolved for this release: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12315820version=12332143 The vote will be open for 72 hours. Please download the release candidate, check the hashes/signature, build it and test it, and then please vote: [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache REEF 0.12.0-incubating [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks!
Re: [DRAFT] August 2015 Board Report - Please Review
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:13 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:47 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:43 PM Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:31 PM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:10 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: Geode was supposed to report - but its not included in the missing reports list. Hmm very good point. podlings.xml indicates they shouldn't have, but based on when they entered the incubator they should have. Even going back to rev 1 of the page, they are missing. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/August2015?action=recallrev=1 So does anyone have any recommendations on how to handle it? I'll look at the history to see why they were removed. Geode's entry in podlings.xml indicated that they were to be monthly for May, June, July. Therefore, I removed them this month -- and specifically sent an email telling them not to report, since the report reminder had already gone out. Yep, just got to the same conclusion. It happens. For those interested, here's the commit that removed them. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml?r1=1692672r2=1692887pathrev=1695191 and the May report, which includes them as a new podling but no report from them. http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/May2015 It turns out that Geode did not report in May, so they only filed monthly for two months. It's too late for this report cycle. Their next scheduled report will be in October. Agreed. I think the decision to file an out-of-cycle report in September should be left to Geode's Mentors. Agreed, though I would urge their mentors to decide that a special report should be filed in September. I don't agree. If Geode was a TLP the board would have asked them to report the next month - and we should treat them the same way. They're supposed to know when they should report and thats usually the attitude the board expresses to missed reports. Also, the mentors didn't pick up the fact they'd only filed two monthly reports - so I think we (IPMC) should require it. This is a good learning experience :) September is next month, so I'm not sure I understand the conflict here. Is your concern about leaving it up to the mentors? Considering who the mentors are, I doubt they will have any concerns with producing a report for September, considering the circumstances. Niall Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: oh! We preferred that during our discussion. Somehow we thought there was a limit. I have changed it to full names (APEX-CORE, APEX-MALHAR). If there is a limit we can reduce the number of chars later. wiki is updated. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ApexProposal Hyphens are not allowed as project keys, but underscore is a possibility. The default format is only upper case letters - but you'll need to check what ASF has configured. https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA/Changing+the+Project+Key+Format Niall Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Hitesh Shah hit...@apache.org wrote: If there isn’t a char limit on project names in JIRA, wouldn’t it just be better to use “APEX-CORE” and “APEX-MALHAR” to match the actual project names, repos, etc? thanks — Hitesh On Aug 11, 2015, at 1:25 PM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Chris, Thanks for articulating what I was going to respond with after talking to folks here. We indeed see versions for Malhar and Apex differing. We expect Malhar versions to change much more rapidly than Apex. Ted, We discussed the impact of single jira on versioning. For example we expect Malhar X.0.0 to happen much earlier than Apex X.0.0. There was discomfort in naming versions with prefix. The consensus was to have version numbers convey stuff. If folks don't have strong opinion on two jiras, we would prefer to use two jiras. We have taken up Bertrand's scope naming and changed the names of jira projects as follows APX-CORE APX-MLHR I have changed the wiki to reflect the above as jira project names. Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Chris Nauroth cnaur...@hortonworks.com wrote: One thing to consider is that release version numbers are tied to specific JIRA projects. If the intention is for Apex and Malhar version numbers to be independent, then using a single JIRA project could introduce some risk of confusion if an Apex version number accidentally gets applied to a Malhar issue. It might necessitate prefixing the version numbers with apex- and malhar- to differentiate. Based on that, I have a slight preference for separate JIRA projects. However, I don't object to using a single unified JIRA project if others feel strongly about it. --Chris Nauroth On 8/11/15, 8:23 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Ted, I agree that repo is more critical than jira instance. I am taking up your suggesstion with folks and should get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - 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: [DRAFT] August 2015 Board Report - Please Review
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:10 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com
wrote:
Geode was supposed to report - but its not included in the missing reports
list.
Hmm very good point. podlings.xml indicates they shouldn't have, but based
on when they entered the incubator they should have. Even going back to
rev 1 of the page, they are missing.
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/August2015?action=recallrev=1
So does anyone have any recommendations on how to handle it? I'll look at
the history to see why they were removed.
John
Niall
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:30 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org
wrote:
All,
I'd like to present the draft board report for additional community
input.
We have reports expected from 19 podlings, 12 reported, 7 did not. Of
the
7 that did not report, I left in the shepherd comments on 2 (myself and
Justin Mclean) who had some additional insights on the welfare of the
podlings in question.
There are multiple podlings without mentor sign off - Blur, ODF Toolkit,
Twill and Sentry. Its not too late to sign off, so if you can get those
signatures in great. If you cannot, or feel there is an issue with the
report please bring it up and we'll need to move them to non-reporting.
I've copied the current body below.
= Incubator PMC report for August 2015 =
=== Timeline ===
||Wed August 05 ||Podling reports due by end of day ||
||Sun August 09 ||Shepherd reviews due by end of day ||
||Sun August 09 ||Summary due by end of day ||
||Tue August 11 ||Mentor signoff due by end of day ||
||Wed August 12 ||Report submitted to Board ||
||Wed August 19 ||Board meeting ||
=== Shepherd Assignments ===
||Andrei Savu ||AsterixDB ||
||Andrei Savu ||Kylin ||
||Drew Farris ||Blur ||
||John Ament ||Calcite ||
||John Ament ||Droids ||
||Justin Mclean ||BatchEE ||
||Matthew Franklin ||DataFu ||
||Matthew Franklin ||Tamaya ||
||Matthew Franklin ||Twill ||
||P. Taylor Goetz ||FreeMarker ||
||P. Taylor Goetz ||Trafodion ||
||Raphael Bircher ||Sirona ||
||Raphael Bircher ||Slider ||
||Ross Gardler ||Ripple ||
||Suresh Marru ||ODF Toolkit ||
||Suresh Marru ||REEF ||
||Suresh Marru ||TinkerPop ||
||Timothy Chen ||Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer ||
||Timothy Chen ||Kalumet ||
=== Report content ===
{{{
Incubator PMC report for August 2015
The Apache Incubator is the entry path into the ASF for projects and
codebases wishing to become part of the Foundation's efforts.
There are 43 podlings currently under incubation.
* Community
New IPMC members:
Flavio Junquiero
People who left the IPMC:
(none)
* New Podlings
No new podlings entered the incubator this month.
* Graduations
The board has motions for the following:
Ignite
* Releases
The following releases were made since the last Incubator report:
2015-07-27 - apache-brooklyn-0.7.0-incubating
2015-07-24 - Apache-Twill-0.6.0-incubating
2015-07-23 - Apache-Zeppelin-0.5.0-incubating release
2015-07-22 - apache-ripple-emulator-0.9.30-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-ignite-1.3.0-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-samoa-0.3.0-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-kylin-0.7.2-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-tinkerpop-3.0.0-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-usergrid-1.0.2-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-nifi-0.2.0-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-groovy-2.4.4-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-lens-2.2.0-beta-incubating
2015-07-09 - apache-sentry-1.5.1-incubating
2015-07-09 - apache-atlas-0.5-incubating
* IP Clearance
JBoss HornetQ code grant to the ActiveMQ PMC.
* Legal / Trademarks
* Infrastructure
Marvin board report reminders went out this month. There was
much rejoicing.
* Miscellaneous
* Report Manager: John D. Ament
Summary of podling reports
* Still getting started at the Incubator
AsterixDB
Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer
DataFu
FreeMarker
* Not yet ready to graduate
No release:
Blur
Tamaya
Community growth:
Kylin
Trafodion
Twill
* Ready to graduate
Calcite
The Board has motions for the following:
Ignite
* Did not report, expected next month
BatchEE (Shepherd notes remaining)
Droids (Shepherd notes remaining)
Kalumet
REEF
Ripple
Slider
Tinkerpop
--
Table of Contents
AsterixDB
BatchEE (notes only)
Blur
Calcite
Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer
DataFu
Droids (notes only)
FreeMarker
Kylin
ODF Toolkit
Sirona
Tamaya
Trafodion
Twill
--
AsterixDB
Apache AsterixDB is a scalable big data management system (BDMS)
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
Btw this discussion is typical of the ones I have had with Amol. Every decision has a rationale, or the community is willing to be flexible. The willingness to listen and to justify decisions bodes very well for an incubation, I think. On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: oh! We preferred that during our discussion. Somehow we thought there was a limit. I have changed it to full names (APEX-CORE, APEX-MALHAR). If there is a limit we can reduce the number of chars later. wiki is updated. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ApexProposal Hyphens are not allowed as project keys, but underscore is a possibility. The default format is only upper case letters - but you'll need to check what ASF has configured. https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA/Changing+the+Project+Key+Format Niall Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Hitesh Shah hit...@apache.org wrote: If there isn’t a char limit on project names in JIRA, wouldn’t it just be better to use “APEX-CORE” and “APEX-MALHAR” to match the actual project names, repos, etc? thanks — Hitesh On Aug 11, 2015, at 1:25 PM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Chris, Thanks for articulating what I was going to respond with after talking to folks here. We indeed see versions for Malhar and Apex differing. We expect Malhar versions to change much more rapidly than Apex. Ted, We discussed the impact of single jira on versioning. For example we expect Malhar X.0.0 to happen much earlier than Apex X.0.0. There was discomfort in naming versions with prefix. The consensus was to have version numbers convey stuff. If folks don't have strong opinion on two jiras, we would prefer to use two jiras. We have taken up Bertrand's scope naming and changed the names of jira projects as follows APX-CORE APX-MLHR I have changed the wiki to reflect the above as jira project names. Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Chris Nauroth cnaur...@hortonworks.com wrote: One thing to consider is that release version numbers are tied to specific JIRA projects. If the intention is for Apex and Malhar version numbers to be independent, then using a single JIRA project could introduce some risk of confusion if an Apex version number accidentally gets applied to a Malhar issue. It might necessitate prefixing the version numbers with apex- and malhar- to differentiate. Based on that, I have a slight preference for separate JIRA projects. However, I don't object to using a single unified JIRA project if others feel strongly about it. --Chris Nauroth On 8/11/15, 8:23 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Ted, I agree that repo is more critical than jira instance. I am taking up your suggesstion with folks and should get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - 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: [DRAFT] August 2015 Board Report - Please Review
Geode was supposed to report - but its not included in the missing reports
list.
Niall
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:30 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org
wrote:
All,
I'd like to present the draft board report for additional community input.
We have reports expected from 19 podlings, 12 reported, 7 did not. Of the
7 that did not report, I left in the shepherd comments on 2 (myself and
Justin Mclean) who had some additional insights on the welfare of the
podlings in question.
There are multiple podlings without mentor sign off - Blur, ODF Toolkit,
Twill and Sentry. Its not too late to sign off, so if you can get those
signatures in great. If you cannot, or feel there is an issue with the
report please bring it up and we'll need to move them to non-reporting.
I've copied the current body below.
= Incubator PMC report for August 2015 =
=== Timeline ===
||Wed August 05 ||Podling reports due by end of day ||
||Sun August 09 ||Shepherd reviews due by end of day ||
||Sun August 09 ||Summary due by end of day ||
||Tue August 11 ||Mentor signoff due by end of day ||
||Wed August 12 ||Report submitted to Board ||
||Wed August 19 ||Board meeting ||
=== Shepherd Assignments ===
||Andrei Savu ||AsterixDB ||
||Andrei Savu ||Kylin ||
||Drew Farris ||Blur ||
||John Ament ||Calcite ||
||John Ament ||Droids ||
||Justin Mclean ||BatchEE ||
||Matthew Franklin ||DataFu ||
||Matthew Franklin ||Tamaya ||
||Matthew Franklin ||Twill ||
||P. Taylor Goetz ||FreeMarker ||
||P. Taylor Goetz ||Trafodion ||
||Raphael Bircher ||Sirona ||
||Raphael Bircher ||Slider ||
||Ross Gardler ||Ripple ||
||Suresh Marru ||ODF Toolkit ||
||Suresh Marru ||REEF ||
||Suresh Marru ||TinkerPop ||
||Timothy Chen ||Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer ||
||Timothy Chen ||Kalumet ||
=== Report content ===
{{{
Incubator PMC report for August 2015
The Apache Incubator is the entry path into the ASF for projects and
codebases wishing to become part of the Foundation's efforts.
There are 43 podlings currently under incubation.
* Community
New IPMC members:
Flavio Junquiero
People who left the IPMC:
(none)
* New Podlings
No new podlings entered the incubator this month.
* Graduations
The board has motions for the following:
Ignite
* Releases
The following releases were made since the last Incubator report:
2015-07-27 - apache-brooklyn-0.7.0-incubating
2015-07-24 - Apache-Twill-0.6.0-incubating
2015-07-23 - Apache-Zeppelin-0.5.0-incubating release
2015-07-22 - apache-ripple-emulator-0.9.30-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-ignite-1.3.0-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-samoa-0.3.0-incubating
2015-07-21 - apache-kylin-0.7.2-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-tinkerpop-3.0.0-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-usergrid-1.0.2-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-nifi-0.2.0-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-groovy-2.4.4-incubating
2015-07-16 - apache-lens-2.2.0-beta-incubating
2015-07-09 - apache-sentry-1.5.1-incubating
2015-07-09 - apache-atlas-0.5-incubating
* IP Clearance
JBoss HornetQ code grant to the ActiveMQ PMC.
* Legal / Trademarks
* Infrastructure
Marvin board report reminders went out this month. There was
much rejoicing.
* Miscellaneous
* Report Manager: John D. Ament
Summary of podling reports
* Still getting started at the Incubator
AsterixDB
Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer
DataFu
FreeMarker
* Not yet ready to graduate
No release:
Blur
Tamaya
Community growth:
Kylin
Trafodion
Twill
* Ready to graduate
Calcite
The Board has motions for the following:
Ignite
* Did not report, expected next month
BatchEE (Shepherd notes remaining)
Droids (Shepherd notes remaining)
Kalumet
REEF
Ripple
Slider
Tinkerpop
--
Table of Contents
AsterixDB
BatchEE (notes only)
Blur
Calcite
Climate Model Diagnostic Analyzer
DataFu
Droids (notes only)
FreeMarker
Kylin
ODF Toolkit
Sirona
Tamaya
Trafodion
Twill
--
AsterixDB
Apache AsterixDB is a scalable big data management system (BDMS) that
provides storage, management, and query capabilities for large collections
of semi-structured data.
AsterixDB has been incubating since 2015-02-28.
Three most important issues to address in the move towards graduation:
1. Migrate issues from Google Code
2. Do an Apache release.
3. Grow community
Any issues that the Incubator PMC (IPMC) or ASF Board wish/need to be
aware of?
1. The most urgent issue right now is to migrate the issues from the
Google Code tracker to the ASF JIRA (INFRA-9954) as Google Code turns
read-only on Aug 24. The issue was open with sporadic activity for
some time.
Re: [DISCUSS] Apex Incubation Proposal
Niall, Thanks for catching. I replaced '-' with '_' as per atlassian policy. I am suspecting that ASF does not allow '_' as none of the project keys have '_'. I have added a comment that '_' can be removed if that is the policy. Wiki updated. Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: oh! We preferred that during our discussion. Somehow we thought there was a limit. I have changed it to full names (APEX-CORE, APEX-MALHAR). If there is a limit we can reduce the number of chars later. wiki is updated. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ApexProposal Hyphens are not allowed as project keys, but underscore is a possibility. The default format is only upper case letters - but you'll need to check what ASF has configured. https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA/Changing+the+Project+Key+Format Niall Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Hitesh Shah hit...@apache.org wrote: If there isn’t a char limit on project names in JIRA, wouldn’t it just be better to use “APEX-CORE” and “APEX-MALHAR” to match the actual project names, repos, etc? thanks — Hitesh On Aug 11, 2015, at 1:25 PM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Chris, Thanks for articulating what I was going to respond with after talking to folks here. We indeed see versions for Malhar and Apex differing. We expect Malhar versions to change much more rapidly than Apex. Ted, We discussed the impact of single jira on versioning. For example we expect Malhar X.0.0 to happen much earlier than Apex X.0.0. There was discomfort in naming versions with prefix. The consensus was to have version numbers convey stuff. If folks don't have strong opinion on two jiras, we would prefer to use two jiras. We have taken up Bertrand's scope naming and changed the names of jira projects as follows APX-CORE APX-MLHR I have changed the wiki to reflect the above as jira project names. Thks, Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Chris Nauroth cnaur...@hortonworks.com wrote: One thing to consider is that release version numbers are tied to specific JIRA projects. If the intention is for Apex and Malhar version numbers to be independent, then using a single JIRA project could introduce some risk of confusion if an Apex version number accidentally gets applied to a Malhar issue. It might necessitate prefixing the version numbers with apex- and malhar- to differentiate. Based on that, I have a slight preference for separate JIRA projects. However, I don't object to using a single unified JIRA project if others feel strongly about it. --Chris Nauroth On 8/11/15, 8:23 AM, Amol Kekre a...@datatorrent.com wrote: Ted, I agree that repo is more critical than jira instance. I am taking up your suggesstion with folks and should get back soon. Thks Amol On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: I personally see far less reason for separate JIRA instances than git repos. Having all jiras under APEX seems a good choice. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 11, 2015, at 2:32, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: As for JIRA, I would apply the same rule, so APX-CORE and APX-MHAR maybe. - 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: [DRAFT] August 2015 Board Report - Please Review
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 12:47 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:43 PM Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:31 PM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 7:10 PM Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote: Geode was supposed to report - but its not included in the missing reports list. Hmm very good point. podlings.xml indicates they shouldn't have, but based on when they entered the incubator they should have. Even going back to rev 1 of the page, they are missing. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/August2015?action=recallrev=1 So does anyone have any recommendations on how to handle it? I'll look at the history to see why they were removed. Geode's entry in podlings.xml indicated that they were to be monthly for May, June, July. Therefore, I removed them this month -- and specifically sent an email telling them not to report, since the report reminder had already gone out. Yep, just got to the same conclusion. It happens. For those interested, here's the commit that removed them. http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml?r1=1692672r2=1692887pathrev=1695191 and the May report, which includes them as a new podling but no report from them. http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/May2015 It turns out that Geode did not report in May, so they only filed monthly for two months. It's too late for this report cycle. Their next scheduled report will be in October. Agreed. I think the decision to file an out-of-cycle report in September should be left to Geode's Mentors. Agreed, though I would urge their mentors to decide that a special report should be filed in September. I don't agree. If Geode was a TLP the board would have asked them to report the next month - and we should treat them the same way. They're supposed to know when they should report and thats usually the attitude the board expresses to missed reports. Also, the mentors didn't pick up the fact they'd only filed two monthly reports - so I think we (IPMC) should require it. This is a good learning experience :) Niall Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
