Re: ODF Toolkit may need help
As this discussion is taking place someone just asked to join the project On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If that > is not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the correction. > > What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain > name offtoolkit.org. What happens to that? > > Regards, > Dave > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein wrote: >> >> The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed. >>> On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher" wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament wrote: Hi Rob, > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament > wrote: >> All, >> >> I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling. >> >> This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now. Last month they >> filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the > mailing >> list. They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, but > from >> what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth. I'd like to seek >> input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe >>> get >> help for this podling. >> >> John > > > I am the mentor who did not sign off last month. You may have noticed > that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some > time now. I'd sum up accomplishments to date as: > > 1) We've done a few podling releases. > > 2) IP review is in good shape > > 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions > > 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but > has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers. > > 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list > and occasional patch submissions I have noticed that. Has the podling been made aware that the report shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably >>> not a good sign? It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed off >>> on. > > These are all good steps towards graduation. However, the community > thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to > sustain a TLP. If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active > developers we would be in great shape. As mentor I've given advice > when asked, and when I thought needed. But I'm not standing there > with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do. I don't think > that makes a sustainable community. > > I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another > project (or Podling) really solves anything. The Attic is one option, > but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small) > community. They would probably just set up on github and continue > with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside > of Apache. So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death > of the ODF Toolkit. The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed. >>> >>> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The >>> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to put it >>> in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer. >>> >>> This is decision for the community such as it is to make. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >>> > > Regards, > > -Rob > > - > 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 > -- Cheers, Ian C - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: ODF Toolkit may need help
If the podling *has* cleared all IP, then I could see allowing it. But we certainly don't want improper IP residing in the Attic. These aren't Apache projects until graduation, so don't really belong. I can see releases strengthening the argument for archival. Henri should be able to clarify. Cheers, -g On Sep 5, 2015 3:35 AM, "Dave Fisher" wrote: > I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If > that is not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the > correction. > > What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain > name offtoolkit.org. What happens to that? > > Regards, > Dave > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > > > > The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed. > >> On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher" wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Rob, > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament > wrote: > > All, > > > > I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling. > > > > This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now. Last month > they > > filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the > mailing > > list. They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, > but > from > > what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth. I'd like to > seek > > input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and maybe > >> get > > help for this podling. > > > > John > > > I am the mentor who did not sign off last month. You may have noticed > that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some > time now. I'd sum up accomplishments to date as: > > 1) We've done a few podling releases. > > 2) IP review is in good shape > > 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions > > 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but > has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers. > > 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list > and occasional patch submissions > >>> > >>> I have noticed that. Has the podling been made aware that the report > >>> shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably > >> not a > >>> good sign? It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed off > >> on. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > These are all good steps towards graduation. However, the community > thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to > sustain a TLP. If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active > developers we would be in great shape. As mentor I've given advice > when asked, and when I thought needed. But I'm not standing there > with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do. I don't think > that makes a sustainable community. > > I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another > project (or Podling) really solves anything. The Attic is one option, > but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small) > community. They would probably just set up on github and continue > with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside > of Apache. So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the death > of the ODF Toolkit. > >>> > >>> The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other > >>> attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed. > >> > >> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The > >> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to > put it > >> in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer. > >> > >> This is decision for the community such as it is to make. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Dave > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > > Regards, > > -Rob > > - > 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 > >
[NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Hereby the official notice that multiple developers have left apache Corinthia. I am sad that I as (former) mentor, was not able to keep the community in apache. A little constructive support from the IPMC had probably prevented the meltdown. The developer community continues the teamwork in a new home. rgds jan i.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Kylin-1.0-incubating
Thanks Justin, we will double check all those files and licenses to make sure clean in next release (will kick off soon after this release). JIRA created for tracking here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KYLIN-999 Thanks. Best Regards! - Luke Han On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > Justin, would you be ok if we file JIRA tickets to keep track the next > > release for both website and LICENSE issues? > > Yep that’s a good idea. You have the required 3 +1 votes for a release > (assuming no changes their vote) so you don’t need to ask me :-) > > Thanks, > Justin > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Both Bertrand and I have tried to become involved in this and help avert this melt-down. There is clearly quite a lot of back-channel happening that is not visible to the Apache mailing lists and I (and apparently Bertrand) have been unable to get our sub requests moderated through in time. It may be that working with Apache processes is not what the majority of the project wanted as part of their project. Apache is definitely not for everybody. I am very sorry to see this happen in this fashion, however. Splits can happen amicably and do not require high drama. I will continue to try to piece together what the best course of action is over the next few days (holiday be damned) and hope that I can get the help of others as well. On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:42 AM, jan i wrote: > Hereby the official notice that multiple developers have left apache > Corinthia. > > I am sad that I as (former) mentor, was not able to keep the community in > apache. A little constructive support from the IPMC had probably prevented > the meltdown. > > The developer community continues the teamwork in a new home. > > rgds > jan i. >
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
On Saturday, September 5, 2015, Ted Dunning wrote: > Both Bertrand and I have tried to become involved in this and help avert > this melt-down. There is clearly quite a lot of back-channel happening that > is not visible to the Apache mailing lists and I (and apparently Bertrand) > have been unable to get our sub requests moderated through in time. To be quite blunt, you have a strange way of getting involved, why totally ignore the recommendations from the mentors and the development team and instead try to piece together everything yourself. Did you talk with Dave ? The reaaignations was sent from each person to private@, the notice is simple to normal apache conclusion of the resigning, so please do not accuse the development team of not following rules. It is not illegal for people to talk together, decisions must be on the ML, and they are. without telling what happened on private@ i.a.o, I feel you should have acted when the mentors asked for help, instead of suggesting to reboot the mentors. As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay. > > It may be that working with Apache processes is not what the majority of > the project wanted as part of their project. Apache is definitely not for > everybody. This is wrong thinking, I have not heard one of the developers being unwilling to follow apache rules quite the opposite, please read the ML and you will see how often e.g. Peter have stated that. To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations. Corinthia had a healthy development community, and IPMC decided to ignore that and support what was seen as a strange interpretor of the apache rules. Dave told that it would happen and so did I, so you cannot be surprised. > > I am very sorry to see this happen in this fashion, however. Splits can > happen amicably and do not require high drama. I will continue to try to > piece together what the best course of action is over the next few days > (holiday be damned) and hope that I can get the help of others as well. > I had very high hopes for this project in apache, both because I believe in the project and in Apache, but I am not alone in saying, the attitude of the IPMC is disapointing. It is fine that you and bertrand goes in to help, but it would have been great if you had supported the mentors and believed what we as mentors told IPMC. Sorry for a strong mail, but seeing a Podling go down the drain for something that should be logical caused me to respond like this. Rgds jan i. > > > > On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 4:42 AM, jan i > > wrote: > > > Hereby the official notice that multiple developers have left apache > > Corinthia. > > > > I am sad that I as (former) mentor, was not able to keep the community in > > apache. A little constructive support from the IPMC had probably > prevented > > the meltdown. > > > > The developer community continues the teamwork in a new home. > > > > rgds > > jan i. > > > -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: Shepherd notes for ODF Toolkit
Having extra hands is really important. On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:05 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Wednesday, September 2, 2015, John D. Ament > wrote: > > > All, > > > > I'm adding some shepherd notes for ODF Toolkit. I think my main concern > is > > lack of mentor participation on the project. Rob Weir (I swear every > time > > I type his name I type the d) has taken a mentor role on the project, but > > doesn't seem to be in podlings.xml. I'm not too worried about this, but > > can we add him to podlings.xml (if so, I'll add him)? > > > > I added this yesterday. Thanks for pointing it out. > > > > > It may help the project to bring in an extra mentor, I'd like to > volunteer > > to help out to get things moving but wanted to get input from the > incubator > > and the podling on their thoughts. If there are others who are > interested > > it may help to look at all options. > > > Having more than one active mentor is always a good idea, so there is > coverage in case one is temporarily unavailable due to travel or whatever. > > > Regards, > > -Rob > > > > > > John > > >
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:36 PM, jan i wrote: > As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access > within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he > should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay. Ted is doing what he can, and it's only been a few days. We are all volunteers and do not always have the freedom to drop what we are doing to give Incubator matters our full attention. > To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call > from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a > reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help > the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I > was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations. What I wish everyone involved would strive to remember is that personnel conflicts are inherently difficult and draining, that mistakes are often made and responses often poorly calibrated, and that there are real people receiving these emails who may experience intense emotions as they read them. PS: Surely this response is imperfect as well. Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: ODF Toolkit may need help
I don't see any project within the Attic that came there from the Incubator. If one did, it should have passed its IP items already. My opinion on domain names for a project not graduating is that we give it back to who gave it to us, or if they don't want it back, let them decide who we should give it to. Hen On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > If the podling *has* cleared all IP, then I could see allowing it. But we > certainly don't want improper IP residing in the Attic. These aren't Apache > projects until graduation, so don't really belong. I can see releases > strengthening the argument for archival. > > Henri should be able to clarify. > > Cheers, > -g > On Sep 5, 2015 3:35 AM, "Dave Fisher" wrote: > >> I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If >> that is not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the >> correction. >> >> What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain >> name offtoolkit.org. What happens to that? >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> > On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein wrote: >> > >> > The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed. >> >> On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher" wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> >>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Rob, >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament > > >> wrote: >> > All, >> > >> > I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling. >> > >> > This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now. Last month >> they >> > filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the >> mailing >> > list. They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, >> but >> from >> > what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth. I'd like to >> seek >> > input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and >> maybe >> >> get >> > help for this podling. >> > >> > John >> >> >> I am the mentor who did not sign off last month. You may have >> noticed >> that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some >> time now. I'd sum up accomplishments to date as: >> >> 1) We've done a few podling releases. >> >> 2) IP review is in good shape >> >> 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions >> >> 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but >> has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers. >> >> 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list >> and occasional patch submissions >> >>> >> >>> I have noticed that. Has the podling been made aware that the report >> >>> shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably >> >> not a >> >>> good sign? It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed >> off >> >> on. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> These are all good steps towards graduation. However, the community >> thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to >> sustain a TLP. If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active >> developers we would be in great shape. As mentor I've given advice >> when asked, and when I thought needed. But I'm not standing there >> with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do. I don't think >> that makes a sustainable community. >> >> I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another >> project (or Podling) really solves anything. The Attic is one >> option, >> but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small) >> community. They would probably just set up on github and continue >> with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside >> of Apache. So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the >> death >> of the ODF Toolkit. >> >>> >> >>> The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other >> >>> attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed. >> >> >> >> Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The >> >> incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to >> put it >> >> in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer. >> >> >> >> This is decision for the community such as it is to make. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >> Regards, >> >> -Rob >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> >> >> >> --
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > PS: Surely this response is imperfect as well. > Such imperfections are not visible to humans. At the least, it is pretty damned good. Thanks.
Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly
Hi Marvin, Very true. I am sorry that we did not come to the IPMC sooner. Perhaps after my second attempt to cool things. Maybe a mentor should use frustration to determine when ask for help. Maybe it should not be private@. What if there was a mentor@ private ML explicitly for this help? Mentor confidential. I think the Incubator being separate from ComDev may also be an issue. It can take time to grow a community and learn the balance between policy and pace of conversation. Apache can not be only policy. To many in the podling it began to feel like that - only policy. People asked for that to cool. Also Apache needs a release policy for binaries that would allow the best UX/UI API for the platform to be used even if it is GPL. If you have subscribed to legal-discuss the last few months you know why that discussion was impossible. If that can be worked out then at least it would help other projects. Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 5, 2015, at 6:16 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 3:36 PM, jan i wrote: >> >> As noted elsewhere, I saw the request from bertrand and he had access >> within an hour, I never saw yours (Dennis is also moderator, so he >> should/can have seen it), so I do not understand the delay. > > Ted is doing what he can, and it's only been a few days. We are all > volunteers and do not always have the freedom to drop what we are > doing to give Incubator matters our full attention. > >> To be very honest the IPMC have had plenty of time to react on the call >> from Dave and Me, but decided to react differently. There was a >> reason why I resigned as mentor, it was not because I did not want to help >> the community, but because the IPMC told me quite clearly how wrong I >> was...and just maybe that was the drop that caused the resignations. > > What I wish everyone involved would strive to remember is that > personnel conflicts are inherently difficult and draining, that > mistakes are often made and responses often poorly calibrated, and > that there are real people receiving these emails who may experience > intense emotions as they read them. > > PS: Surely this response is imperfect as well. > > Marvin Humphrey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: ODF Toolkit may need help
Thanks. Regarding domain names that's good advice. Should retirement happen we can follow that course. There seems to be fresh blood in the project. We will need to see. Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 5, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > > I don't see any project within the Attic that came there from the > Incubator. > > If one did, it should have passed its IP items already. > > My opinion on domain names for a project not graduating is that we give it > back to who gave it to us, or if they don't want it back, let them decide > who we should give it to. > > Hen > >> On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Greg Stein wrote: >> >> If the podling *has* cleared all IP, then I could see allowing it. But we >> certainly don't want improper IP residing in the Attic. These aren't Apache >> projects until graduation, so don't really belong. I can see releases >> strengthening the argument for archival. >> >> Henri should be able to clarify. >> >> Cheers, >> -g >>> On Sep 5, 2015 3:35 AM, "Dave Fisher" wrote: >>> >>> I recollect seeing a retiring podling with releases go to the attic. If >>> that is not correct or it was an exceptional case then thanks for the >>> correction. >>> >>> What would be done with domain names? The podling came in with the domain >>> name offtoolkit.org. What happens to that? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Greg Stein wrote: The Attic is for Apache projects. Podlings are simply retired/removed. > On Sep 4, 2015 9:23 AM, "Dave Fisher" wrote: > > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 3, 2015, at 5:12 AM, John D. Ament >>> wrote: >> >> Hi Rob, >>> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:56 AM Rob Weir wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:25 AM, John D. Ament >>> >>> wrote: All, I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling. This podling has been incubating for over 4 years now. Last month >>> they filed a report without mentor sign off, without any feedback on the >>> mailing list. They have remained partially active throughout the 4 years, >>> but >>> from what I can tell suffering a bit in community growth. I'd like to >>> seek input from the incubator on how to potentially resolve this and >>> maybe > get help for this podling. John >>> >>> >>> I am the mentor who did not sign off last month. You may have >>> noticed >>> that the podling has been filing nearly identical reports for some >>> time now. I'd sum up accomplishments to date as: >>> >>> 1) We've done a few podling releases. >>> >>> 2) IP review is in good shape >>> >>> 3) Community gets along well, no significant frictions >>> >>> 4) Community has added new committers outside the original PPMC, but >>> has also lost its original corporate-sponsored developers. >>> >>> 5) The code is being used, as seen by incoming traffic on users list >>> and occasional patch submissions >> >> I have noticed that. Has the podling been made aware that the report >> shouldn't be a copy and paste, and that stagnating growth is probably > not a >> good sign? It would help to explain why their report wasn't signed >>> off > on. >> >> >> >> >>> >>> These are all good steps towards graduation. However, the community >>> thinks, and I tend to agree, that the activity level is too low to >>> sustain a TLP. If we were able to attract another 2 or 3 active >>> developers we would be in great shape. As mentor I've given advice >>> when asked, and when I thought needed. But I'm not standing there >>> with a whip and a megaphone telling them what to do. I don't think >>> that makes a sustainable community. >>> >>> I don't think shuffling the code around within Apache, to another >>> project (or Podling) really solves anything. The Attic is one >>> option, >>> but my guess is that would end the podling but not the (albeit small) >>> community. They would probably just set up on github and continue >>> with the same pace of activity, with a lighterweight process, outside >>> of Apache. So, personally, I don't think the Attic would be the >>> death >>> of the ODF Toolkit. >> >> The attic should be considered only as a last stitch effort, all other >> attempts at resolving the podling have been tried and failed. > > Nothing stops anyone from forking the podling to another location. The > incubator would need to do something with the code. That would be to >>> put it > in the attic as an archive, as not maintained any longer. > > This is decision for the community such as it is to make. > > Regards, > Dave > > >>
[Result][VOTE] Release Apache Kylin-1.0-incubating
This vote passes with 5 +1s +1 Henry Saputra (binding) +1 P. Taylor Goetz (binding) +1 Marvin Humphrey (binding) +1 Julian Hyde (binding) +1 Luke Han (none-binding) and 0 votes, and 1 -1s: Justin Mclean (binding) As discussion, Kylin community will process to release this version and tracked issue via this JIRA and will be fixed in next release: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KYLIN-999 Thanks everyone. We’ll now roll the release out to the mirrors. Luke Han, on behalf of Apache Kylin PPMC - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
