Re: Are MySQL driver and MySQL protocol allowed in distribution?

[Karl Wright]

You can't distribute the MySQL driver, but as long as you don't distribute
the driver, you are free to solve the problem any way you like.  You can
require that the user download the driver themselves, or you can develop
your own driver -- all of those are fine.

Karl


On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 6:20 AM, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:

> Hi,
> Someone asked whether could provide a mysql based storage implemention for
> SKyWalking.
> I am aware mysql driver is under GPL, so should not be allowed, right?
> Then how about the mysql protocol? If they implement the codes by
> themself, because the storage required a few features compared to the real
> driver.
>
>
> Thanks
> Sheng Wu

Re: JSON License and Apache Projects

[Karl Wright]

The Apache ManifoldCF project got an official Legal ruling on the json
license and accepted it many years ago.

Thanks,
Karl



On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Guillaume Laforge 
wrote:

> And Apache Groovy also has some great JSON support as well, with a super
> fast parser, and serializer as well.
> So there's choice at Apache regarding JSON :-D
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Hendrik Dev 
> wrote:
>
> > and of course there is also Apache Johnzon ;-)
> > http://johnzon.apache.org/
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Stephan Ewen  wrote:
> > > Just to be on the safe side:
> > >
> > > If project X depends on another project Y that uses json.org (and thus
> > > project X has json.org as a transitive dependency) is it sufficient to
> > > exclude the transitive json.org dependency in the reference to project
> > Y?
> > >
> > > Something like that:
> > >
> > > 
> > >   org.apache.hive.hcatalog
> > >   hcatalog-core
> > >   0.12.0
> > >   
> > > 
> > >   org.json
> > >   json
> > > 
> > >   
> > > 
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Stephan
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Jochen Theodorou 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> is that library able to deal with the jdk9 module system?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 24.11.2016 02:16, James Bognar wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Shameless plug for Apache Juneau that has a cleanroom implementation
> > of a
> > >>> JSON serializer and parser in context of a common serialization API
> > that
> > >>> includes a variety of serialization languages for POJOs.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:10 PM Ted Dunning 
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> The VP Legal for Apache has determined that the JSON processing
> library
> >  from json.org  is not usable
> > as a
> >  dependency by Apache projects. This is because the license includes
> a
> >  line
> >  that places a field of use condition on downstream users in a way
> > that is
> >  not compatible with Apache's license.
> > 
> >  This decision is, unfortunately, a change from the previous
> situation.
> >  While the current decision is correct, it would have been nice if we
> > had
> >  had this decision originally.
> > 
> >  As such, some existing projects may be impacted because they assumed
> > that
> >  the json.org dependency was OK to use.
> > 
> >  Incubator projects that are currently using the json.org library
> have
> >  several courses of action:
> > 
> >  1) just drop it. Some projects like Storm have demos that use
> > twitter4j
> >  which incorporates the problematic code. These demos aren't core and
> >  could
> >  just be dropped for a time.
> > 
> >  2) help dependencies move away from problem code. I have sent a pull
> >  request to twitter4  >j,
> > for
> >  example, that eliminates the problem. If they accept the pull, then
> > all
> >  would be good for the projects that use twitter4j (and thus
> json.org)
> > 
> >  3) replace the json.org artifact with a compatible one that is open
> >  source.
> >  I have created and published an artifact based on clean-room Android
> > code
> >   that replicates the most
> >  important
> >  parts of the json.org code. This code is compatible, but lacks some
> >  coverage. It also could lead to jar hell if used unjudiciously
> > because it
> >  uses the org.json package. Shading and exclusion in a pom might
> help.
> > Or
> >  not. Go with caution here.
> > 
> >  4) switch to safer alternatives such as Jackson. This requires code
> >  changes, but is probably a good thing to do. This option is the one
> > that
> >  is
> >  best in the long-term but is also the most expensive.
> > 
> > 
> >  -- Forwarded message --
> >  From: Jim Jagielski 
> >  Date: Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 6:10 AM
> >  Subject: JSON License and Apache Projects
> >  To: ASF Board 
> > 
> > 
> >  (forwarded from legal-discuss@)
> > 
> >  As some of you may know, recently the JSON License has been
> >  moved to Category X (https://www.apache.org/legal/
> resolved#category-x
> > ).
> > 
> >  I understand that this has impacted some projects, especially
> >  those in the midst of doing a release. I also understand that
> >  up until now, really, there has been no real "outcry" over our
> >  usage of it, especially from end-users and other consumers of
> >  our projects which use it.
> > 
> >  As compelling as that is, the fact is that the JSON license
> >  itself is not OSI approved and is therefore not, by definition,
> >  an "Open Source license" and, as such, cannot 

Re: New challenges (Was: NOMINATIONS for Incubator PMC Chair)

[Karl Wright]

Congratulations, Jukka!  You've done a fantastic job!

Karl

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Finally, if elected (and assuming the IPMC still exists), I'd serve
 for at most two years before calling for a re-election, or possibly
 much less if I don't find enough free cycles to perform the duty as
 well as it should.

 As already mentioned on private@ earlier, this time is now approaching
 due to a change I didn't yet foresee in February: We're expecting our
 first baby to be born in December. :-)

 In practice this means that the amount of time and energy I have for
 the Incubator has unfortunately already started decreasing (we're
 buying a new home and moving back to Finland at least for a while) and
 will likely drop close to zero in December. Thus it is time to start
 considering the election of a new PMC chair for the Incubator.

 Before calling for an election vote I'd like to open the discussion
 for nominations and more generic thoughts about the future of the
 Incubator. In the past few quarters we've done a reasonably good job
 on improving the flow of the Incubator and getting many troubled or
 otherwise stuck podlings moving forward again. However, there's still
 a lot that could be done. What do you think the Incubator should be
 like?

 Just like I've carved the IPMC chair role to a rather activist form
 that seems to have helped address the most pressing issues we had
 earlier this year, I would expect the next IPMC chair to make the role
 their own. How do you see that and the other Incubator roles, IPMC
 member, mentor, champion, shepherd, etc., evolving?

 Please share your thoughts on the future of the Incubator and nominate
 people you think could best help us reach that vision!

 Let's leave the discussion open for at least a few weeks before
 conducting the election later this month. That should give us a
 resolution to change the IPMC chair in time for the November board
 meeting, and a chance for me to still work together with the elected
 new chair during November to make sure that the transition goes
 smoothly.

 PS. Even though this is a personnel issue, I don't see any particular
 reason for at least all of this discussion to happen on private@. Feel
 free to use private@ for parts of the discussion if appropriate.

 PPS. It would be nice if we could use Apache Steve for the election. 
 Volunteers?

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

 -
 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: DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating)

[Karl Wright]

As I understand it, the doap files are for PMC's.  The incubator is
the PMC here.  That's why you don't get privs to modify files.txt,
because you are not the incubator PMC chair.

Which incubating projects have files.txt references to doap documents
that you know of?

Karl

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 2:56 AM, Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez
juanpablo.san...@gmail.com wrote:
 The files.xml file lists 3 or 4 incubator projects and the doap site (
 http://projects.apache.org/index.html) doesn't specify anything about
 incubating status :-?

 br,
 juan pablo

 On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:

 I don't think you get your own DOAP file until you are a graduated TLP.
 Karl

 On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez
 juanpablo.san...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi,
 
  can someone with enough commit rights add the DOAP file for JSPWiki
  (incubating) to
 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site-tools/trunk/projects/files.xml
 ?
  The file is located at
 
 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jspwiki/site/doap/doap-jspwiki.rdfSo
  far, we haven't been lucky at jspwiki-dev..
 
 
  thanks,
  juan pablo
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez juanpablo.san...@gmail.com
  Date: Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:16 PM
  Subject: Fwd: DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating)
  To: jspwiki-...@incubator.apache.org
 
 
  Can anyone with access to that repo commit the required change? it's just
  adding (at line 96?)
 
  location
 
 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jspwiki/site/doap/doap-jspwiki.rdf
 /location
 
 
  to
 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site-tools/trunk/projects/files.xml
 
 
  thanks  regards,
  juan pablo
 
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez juanpa...@apache.org
  Date: Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:52 AM
  Subject: Re: DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating)
  To: sebb seb...@gmail.com
  Cc: site-...@apache.org
 
 
  Thanks for the info. We'll correct the asfext:pmc entry, commit the file
  and then update the DOAP references file.
 
  regards,
  juan pablo
 
 
  On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:07 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On 8 May 2012 22:17, Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez juanpa...@apache.org
  wrote:
   Hi!
  
   we've placed a DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating) at:
  
  
 
 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jspwiki/site/doap/doap-jspwiki.rdf
 
  The DOAP file is not quite correct.
 
  The asfext:pmc entry should be for the incubator, not jspwiki.
 
  asfext:pmc rdf:resource=http://incubator.apache.org/jspwiki//
  should be
  asfext:pmc rdf:resource=http://incubator.apache.org//
 
   We have one question though, if this DOAP file gets updated (i.e.:
 Apache
   JSPWiki graduates from incubation, so most project URLs do change),
  should
   we ping this list regarding the changes or is there some sort of
  background
   process which does automate the process?
 
  The file of DOAP references [1] is manually maintained.
 
  ASF members and PMC chairs are the main groups that can update the file.
 
  [1]
 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site-tools/trunk/projects/files.xml
 
  
   thanks  regards,
   juan pablo
 

 -
 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: DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating)

[Karl Wright]

 @karl: didn't know about any files.txt, I came accross with one DOAP file
 while looking for Apache CMS site examples, and began to dig backwards,
 ending up at both
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site-tools/trunk/projects/files.xmland
 http://projects.apache.orghttp://projects.apache.org/indexes/pmc.html#Apache%20Incubator


Right, files.xml is where you add TLPs, and technically JSPWiki is an
incubator sub-project at this time, so I don't think that's where you
add it.  I'll defer to Sebb on the proper way of doing this in
incubator since he obviously knows more about it than I do.

Karl

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

Re: DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating)

[Karl Wright]

I don't think you get your own DOAP file until you are a graduated TLP.
Karl

On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez
juanpablo.san...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 can someone with enough commit rights add the DOAP file for JSPWiki
 (incubating) to
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site-tools/trunk/projects/files.xml?
 The file is located at
 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jspwiki/site/doap/doap-jspwiki.rdfSo
 far, we haven't been lucky at jspwiki-dev..


 thanks,
 juan pablo

 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez juanpablo.san...@gmail.com
 Date: Wed, May 9, 2012 at 10:16 PM
 Subject: Fwd: DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating)
 To: jspwiki-...@incubator.apache.org


 Can anyone with access to that repo commit the required change? it's just
 adding (at line 96?)

 location
 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jspwiki/site/doap/doap-jspwiki.rdf/location


 to
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site-tools/trunk/projects/files.xml


 thanks  regards,
 juan pablo


 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez juanpa...@apache.org
 Date: Wed, May 9, 2012 at 8:52 AM
 Subject: Re: DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating)
 To: sebb seb...@gmail.com
 Cc: site-...@apache.org


 Thanks for the info. We'll correct the asfext:pmc entry, commit the file
 and then update the DOAP references file.

 regards,
 juan pablo


 On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 2:07 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 8 May 2012 22:17, Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez juanpa...@apache.org
 wrote:
  Hi!
 
  we've placed a DOAP file for Apache JSPWiki (incubating) at:
 
 
 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/jspwiki/site/doap/doap-jspwiki.rdf

 The DOAP file is not quite correct.

 The asfext:pmc entry should be for the incubator, not jspwiki.

 asfext:pmc rdf:resource=http://incubator.apache.org/jspwiki//
 should be
 asfext:pmc rdf:resource=http://incubator.apache.org//

  We have one question though, if this DOAP file gets updated (i.e.: Apache
  JSPWiki graduates from incubation, so most project URLs do change),
 should
  we ping this list regarding the changes or is there some sort of
 background
  process which does automate the process?

 The file of DOAP references [1] is manually maintained.

 ASF members and PMC chairs are the main groups that can update the file.

 [1]
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/infrastructure/site-tools/trunk/projects/files.xml

 
  thanks  regards,
  juan pablo


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

[RESULT][VOTE] Graduate ManifoldCF as TLP

[Karl Wright]

From the connectors-dev thread we have three binding IPMC +1's.  There
were no -1's.  72 hours have elapsed.  So it looks like the vote
passes!

What are the next steps in getting the resolution added to the board
agenda for May?

Karl


On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 A vote was just completed in the ManifoldCF community on the following
 resolution:

 ==
       WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests
       of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to
       establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and
       maintenance of open-source software for transferring content between
       repositories or search indexes, for distribution at no charge
 to the public;

       NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
       (PMC), to be known as the Apache ManifoldCF Project, be and hereby is
       established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further

       RESOLVED, that the Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is
       responsible for the creation and maintenance of open-source software for
       transferring content between repositories or search indexes,
 for distribution
       at no charge to the public.

       RESOLVED, that the office of Vice President, ManifoldCF be and hereby
       is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction
       of the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache ManifoldCF
       Project, and to have primary responsibility for management of the
       projects within the scope of responsibility of the Apache ManifoldCF
       Project; and be it further

       RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
       appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache ManifoldCF
       Project:

       * Shinichiro Abe     (shinich...@apache.org)
       * Erlend Garåsen    (rid...@apache.org)
       * Piergiorgio Lucidi  (piergior...@apache.org)
       * Hitoshi Ozawa      (hoz...@apache.org)
       * Tommaso Teofili   (tomm...@apache.org)
       * Simon Willnauer    (sim...@apache.org)
       * Karl Wright          (kwri...@apache.org)
       * Jukka Zitting       (ju...@apache.org)

       NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Karl Wright be
       appointed to the office of Vice President, ManifoldCF, to serve in
       accordance with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors
       and the Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement,
       removal or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be
       it further

       RESOLVED, that the initial Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is
       tasked with the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open
       development and increased participation in the ManifoldCF Project; and
       be it further

       RESOLVED, that the initial Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is
       tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator
       ManifoldCF podling; and be it further

       RESOLVED, that all responsibility pertaining to the Apache Incubator
       ManifoldCF podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are
       hereafter discharged.
 ==

 The vote passed with three IPMC members (Jukka Zitting, Tommaso
 Teofili, and Karl Wright).  The thread ID for the vote was:

 be9e17b9-4b38-4611-8047-4bf9caea8...@gmail.com


 Please vote in favor (+1) or against (-1) this resolution.

 Thanks,
 Karl

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

[VOTE] Graduate ManifoldCF as TLP

[Karl Wright]

A vote was just completed in the ManifoldCF community on the following
resolution:

==
   WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests
   of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to
   establish a Project Management Committee charged with the creation and
   maintenance of open-source software for transferring content between
   repositories or search indexes, for distribution at no charge
to the public;

   NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
   (PMC), to be known as the Apache ManifoldCF Project, be and hereby is
   established pursuant to Bylaws of the Foundation; and be it further

   RESOLVED, that the Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is
   responsible for the creation and maintenance of open-source software for
   transferring content between repositories or search indexes,
for distribution
   at no charge to the public.

   RESOLVED, that the office of Vice President, ManifoldCF be and hereby
   is created, the person holding such office to serve at the direction
   of the Board of Directors as the chair of the Apache ManifoldCF
   Project, and to have primary responsibility for management of the
   projects within the scope of responsibility of the Apache ManifoldCF
   Project; and be it further

   RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby are
   appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache ManifoldCF
   Project:

   * Shinichiro Abe (shinich...@apache.org)
   * Erlend Garåsen(rid...@apache.org)
   * Piergiorgio Lucidi  (piergior...@apache.org)
   * Hitoshi Ozawa  (hoz...@apache.org)
   * Tommaso Teofili   (tomm...@apache.org)
   * Simon Willnauer(sim...@apache.org)
   * Karl Wright  (kwri...@apache.org)
   * Jukka Zitting   (ju...@apache.org)

   NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Karl Wright be
   appointed to the office of Vice President, ManifoldCF, to serve in
   accordance with and subject to the direction of the Board of Directors
   and the Bylaws of the Foundation until death, resignation, retirement,
   removal or disqualification, or until a successor is appointed; and be
   it further

   RESOLVED, that the initial Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is
   tasked with the creation of a set of bylaws intended to encourage open
   development and increased participation in the ManifoldCF Project; and
   be it further

   RESOLVED, that the initial Apache ManifoldCF Project be and hereby is
   tasked with the migration and rationalization of the Apache Incubator
   ManifoldCF podling; and be it further

   RESOLVED, that all responsibility pertaining to the Apache Incubator
   ManifoldCF podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator PMC are
   hereafter discharged.
==

The vote passed with three IPMC members (Jukka Zitting, Tommaso
Teofili, and Karl Wright).  The thread ID for the vote was:

be9e17b9-4b38-4611-8047-4bf9caea8...@gmail.com


Please vote in favor (+1) or against (-1) this resolution.

Thanks,
Karl

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

[VOTE] Graduate ManifoldCF as a top-level project

[Karl Wright]

Hearing no discussion, I'm opening the official voting thread.
Vote +1 to graduate ManifoldCF as a TLP.

+1 from me (binding)

Karl


On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 6:23 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 The ManifoldCF community as voted to approach the Incubator with a
 proposal to graduate from Incubation.  Graduation would be as a
 top-level project.  The community vote was complete and unanimous,
 including all mentors and PPMC members, as well as some interested
 parties from the non-committer community.  The vote thread ID is:

 CALV1_=jljca9zjbl-bnv-gux8ffst-8zqxlyfoob89p3ras...@mail.gmail.com

 Based on the feedback from incubator members, I will possibly turn
 this thread into an Incubator vote thread.  But, for now, this thread
 represents non-binding discussion only.

 Comments?
 Karl

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

[WITHDRAW][VOTE] Graduate ManifoldCF as a top-level project

[Karl Wright]

Thanks for the clarification.

I will withdraw the vote and resubmit with a proper resolution.

Thanks,
Karl


On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
 Hi,

 On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hearing no discussion, I'm opening the official voting thread.
 Vote +1 to graduate ManifoldCF as a TLP

 In order for the Incubator PMC to vote, you need to provide a board
 resolution for graduation - See the board minutes at
 http://www.apache.org/foundation/board/calendar.html for examples.

 -Bertrand

 -
 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: [WITHDRAW][VOTE] Graduate ManifoldCF as a top-level project

[Karl Wright]

All that's left are specific exit signoffs from the incubator, and
ongoing mentor checks which are not time-delimited.  Hope that's OK;
if there's anything else you think needs to be done please let me
know.

Thanks!
Karl

On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
 Hi Karl!

 Just in case (to spare you another round): please also make sure your 
 projects status page has been polished and all TODOs and CHECKs got resolved.

 LieGrue,
 strub



 - Original Message -
 From: Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
 To: general@incubator.apache.org
 Cc:
 Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 2:36 PM
 Subject: [WITHDRAW][VOTE] Graduate ManifoldCF as a top-level project

T hanks for the clarification.

 I will withdraw the vote and resubmit with a proper resolution.

 Thanks,
 Karl


 On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
 bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
  Hi,

  On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
 wrote:
  Hearing no discussion, I'm opening the official voting thread.
  Vote +1 to graduate ManifoldCF as a TLP

  In order for the Incubator PMC to vote, you need to provide a board
  resolution for graduation - See the board minutes at
  http://www.apache.org/foundation/board/calendar.html for examples.

  -Bertrand

  -
  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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC6

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me (binding).

Karl

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Shinichiro Abe
shinichiro.ab...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC6.
 This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.

 You can download the release candidate from
 http://people.apache.org/~shinichiro/apache-manifoldcf-0.5-incubating-RC6/
 and there is also a tag in svn under
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.5-incubating-RC6/.

 It has done improvements for its distribution(bin,lib,src)
 and build process as to core dependencies.

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC6

[Karl Wright]

caofyjnysuhk+g0rcppq2r4hbndo2hf6lxpo8xz12gg9rzh1...@mail.gmail.com

Karl


On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Franklin, Matthew B.
mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:
 On 4/12/12 3:35 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:

I should also mention that Jukka voted +1 during the community voting
on this RC, so his vote should be binding here as well.

 For future reference, it is a best practice to include a link to the PPMC
 VOTE thread [1].  It has also been suggested that the RM include in the
 IPMC VOTE thread any IPMC members who have voted +1 on the PPMC VOTE
 thread.

 [1] :
 http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-inc
 ubator-release-vote



Karl

On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 5:45 AM, Tommaso Teofili
tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1 (binding),
 Tommaso

 2012/4/12 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 +1 from me (binding).

 Karl

 On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Shinichiro Abe
 shinichiro.ab...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi,
 
  Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating,
RC6.
  This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 
  You can download the release candidate from
 

http://people.apache.org/~shinichiro/apache-manifoldcf-0.5-incubating-RC
6/
  and there is also a tag in svn under
 

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.5-incubati
ng-RC6/
 .
 
  It has done improvements for its distribution(bin,lib,src)
  and build process as to core dependencies.
 
  Thank you,
  Shinichiro Abe
  -
  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



 -
 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

What happened to all the podling sites?

[Karl Wright]

I happened to notice that a site publish I'd done a week ago did not
actually update our podling site.  Publishing is done in accordance
with [1].  The problem seems to be that someone has wiped out
/www/incubator.apache.org/ except for the content directory, which is
meant solely for the incubator site itself, and changed permissions so
that even people with incubator permissions cannot create
directories anymore:


kwright@minotaur:~/bin$ ls /www/incubator.apache.org
content
kwright@minotaur:~/bin$ ls -lt /www/incubator.apache.org
total 6
drwxr-xr-x  101 svnwc  svnwc  116 Apr  7 22:25 content
kwright@minotaur:~/bin$

If incubator site publishing has changed, please refer me to the new
document that describes how it is done.

Thank you,
Karl

[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html

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

Re: What happened to all the podling sites?

[Karl Wright]

Sorry to be thick - but (to Jukka) just adding content to the path
does not work (because the root directory
/www/incubator.apache.org/content/manifoldcf still needs to be
created by someone with privs greater than I've got), and (to Daniel)
your instructions are too incomplete to follow.  The site is not
svnpubsub'd nor is it in CMS; it's just content that needs to be
copied into place without substitution.

So what I *think* I need is a directory underneath
/www/incubator.apache.org/content called manifoldcf that someone in
the Incubator group has privs to write to.

Karl

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
 Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 04:01:21 -0400:
 I happened to notice that a site publish I'd done a week ago did not
 actually update our podling site.  Publishing is done in accordance
 with [1].  The problem seems to be that someone has wiped out
 /www/incubator.apache.org/ except for the content directory, which is
 meant solely for the incubator site itself, and changed permissions so
 that even people with incubator permissions cannot create
 directories anymore:


 kwright@minotaur:~/bin$ ls /www/incubator.apache.org
 content
 kwright@minotaur:~/bin$ ls -lt /www/incubator.apache.org
 total 6
 drwxr-xr-x  101 svnwc  svnwc  116 Apr  7 22:25 content
 kwright@minotaur:~/bin$

 If incubator site publishing has changed, please refer me to the new
 document that describes how it is done.


 That's normal for CMS/svnpubsub sites.  To publish:

 % ssh -t people.apache.org publish.pl incubator
 or
 https://cms.apache.org/publish/incubator

 (or replace 'incubator' by podling name if it's in CMS)

 Now if after publishing via the CMS (or svnpubsub for non-CMS
 svnpubsub'd podlings), the changes aren't reflected --- please reopen
 INFRA-4594

 Thank you,
 Karl

 [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html

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

Re: What happened to all the podling sites?

[Karl Wright]

Thanks for the help.  We may migrate to svnpubsub in the not-distant
future, especially if that is the standard for TLP's.  But this would
not be the right time to do that, I'm afraid.

Karl

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
 Done, but this is likely the LAST TIME we will accommodate ANY
 sitesthat aren't using at least svnpubsub.



 - Original Message -
 From: Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
 To: Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
 Cc: general@incubator.apache.org; infrastruct...@apache.org
 Sent: Monday, April 9, 2012 5:37 PM
 Subject: Re: What happened to all the podling sites?

 Sorry to be thick - but (to Jukka) just adding content to the path
 does not work (because the root directory
 /www/incubator.apache.org/content/manifoldcf still needs to be
 created by someone with privs greater than I've got), and (to Daniel)
 your instructions are too incomplete to follow.  The site is not
 svnpubsub'd nor is it in CMS; it's just content that needs to be
 copied into place without substitution.

 So what I *think* I need is a directory underneath
 /www/incubator.apache.org/content called manifoldcf that someone in
 the Incubator group has privs to write to.

 Karl

 On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
 wrote:
  Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 04:01:21 -0400:
  I happened to notice that a site publish I'd done a week ago did
 not
  actually update our podling site.  Publishing is done in accordance
  with [1].  The problem seems to be that someone has wiped out
  /www/incubator.apache.org/ except for the content directory, which is
  meant solely for the incubator site itself, and changed permissions so
  that even people with incubator permissions cannot create
  directories anymore:


  kwright@minotaur:~/bin$ ls /www/incubator.apache.org
  content
  kwright@minotaur:~/bin$ ls -lt /www/incubator.apache.org
  total 6
  drwxr-xr-x  101 svnwc  svnwc  116 Apr  7 22:25 content
  kwright@minotaur:~/bin$

  If incubator site publishing has changed, please refer me to the new
  document that describes how it is done.


  That's normal for CMS/svnpubsub sites.  To publish:

  % ssh -t people.apache.org publish.pl incubator
  or
  https://cms.apache.org/publish/incubator

  (or replace 'incubator' by podling name if it's in CMS)

  Now if after publishing via the CMS (or svnpubsub for non-CMS
  svnpubsub'd podlings), the changes aren't reflected --- please
 reopen
  INFRA-4594

  Thank you,
  Karl

  [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/sites.html


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

Re: What happened to all the podling sites?

[Karl Wright]

There was actually some confusion because the manifoldcf directory
never existed.  The site has been under its original name of
connectors which was never changed when the project's name changed.
What happened today was that I added the content directory to the
path in our update script, and attempted to run the script, and got a
permission denied.  A quick ls -lt did not seem to show the
connectors directory under content, so I presumed that that was
the source of the permission error.  I figured while we were messing
with things we might as well get the right name so I asked for
manifoldcf.  But then Jukka became involved then and I *think* he
located the original directory, which may have been there all along
just without proper permissions (?).  Dunno.  Anyhow, things are
working again against the content/connectors directory, so sorry for
the confusion.

Karl

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 6:09 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
 So you're saying that somehow the content/manifoldcf dir was wiped out.
 Were any other podlings affected?

 Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 18:06:46 -0400:
 Thanks for the help.  We may migrate to svnpubsub in the not-distant
 future, especially if that is the standard for TLP's.  But this would
 not be the right time to do that, I'm afraid.

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

Question about standards for -lib and -bin packaging

[Karl Wright]

Hi folks,

Apache source zip/tar files always have a root folder named for the project
and release, e.g. apache-foo-0.1-incubating.  Is there any convention for
-lib and -bin releases?  What is that convention?

Thanks
Karl

Sent from my Windows Phone

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

For all those with interest in the brave newer world of Apache
releases --- there is a build artifact (RC4 in fact) now also
available for inspection.  I'd love to get feedback on the
multi-artifact licenses, readme's, and release organization before we
go through the process of putting it up for a formal vote in the
incubator list.  If you see any further legal/policy problems, please
tell me now. ;-)

You can download the artifacts from http://people.apache.org/~shinichiro.

Thanks,
Karl


On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Ok, you can now browse each different build artifact's license,
 notice, and readme file at:

 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/[README.txt,NOTICE.txt,LICENSE.txt]
 - source
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/lib-license/[README.txt,NOTICE.txt,LICENSE.txt]
 - lib artifact
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/dist-license/[README.txt,NOTICE.txt,LICENSE.txt]
 - binary artifact

 Please let me know what you think now.

 Karl


 On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Franklin, Matthew B.
 mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Karl Wright [mailto:daddy...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 1:24 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question about downloading binaries

Also, making sure the other comments on NOTICEs are addressed as well.

I have gotten extremely confusing advice in this area in the past, and
the available documentation does not help.  I believe I am adhering to
Roy's principles, but before we spin another release candidate, I'd
like it very much if someone with a (hopefully accurate) idea of how
things are supposed to work reviewed our license and notice files.
You can find them here:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/LICENSE.txt
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/NOTICE.txt

 Just looking quickly, the LICENSE file contains a lot of licenses for the 
 jars you were distributing.  For the source release, the ONLY LN 
 attributions needed are the ones for code that you are including in your 
 source.

 If, like many projects, you have no 3rd party source inclusion, the LICENSE 
 file should only contain ASL 2.0 and the NOTICE should have the standard 
 developed at apache note.

 For the binary releases, we have been adding entries for any jars we 
 include, as you have done.  There are a couple of tweaks I would suggest, I 
 propose that you get an agreeable source LN first as I think there is (yet 
 again) a wider discussion to be had regarding convenience binaries...


Thanks!
Karl

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org wrote:
 Hope that helps...  The question is, will Roy (or anyone else) be
 unwilling to vote for the first option?

 Having been one of the people that commented and started the thread, I
feel like I was wearing loose clothing while operating machinery, per Roy's
guidance on the source being the thing that is voted on and the other 
binaries
are merely convenience items, I would support the first option.  Also, making
sure the other comments on NOTICEs are addressed as well.

 Unfortunate that you god dog piled on but hopefully we're all better
prepared going forward.

 Matt Hogstrom
 m...@hogstrom.org

 A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day Without Sunshine

 On Apr 3, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Karl Wright wrote:

-
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: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

Looking into ManifoldCF a bit, I think what you need is

* buildable source release that contains all the source for ManifoldCF
* source release that contains all the custom patches for the
dependencies that need patches

Our mentor(s) are pushing strongly for a source release (which
contains the upstream patches), plus a lib release, which is to be
overlaid on the source release to allow it to build.  I much preferred
a source release and a convenience source+lib release, but that caused
significant objections, so I gave up.

But if others find my original proposal more to their liking, I'd be
happy to reopen the issue.

Karl

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
 (dropped infra@)

 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 I'm exceedingly sorry here that the IPMC as a whole let you down by
 not turning into these issues and dealing with them at the outset.

 Me too.

 Personally, I have no objection to including mutant jars in a -deps
 binary with a clear explanation of what they are, but I would like to
 see some support for that view, because I'd could imagine some
 objections based on recent email.

 Me neither.

 But let me expand on that :-)

 Note the recent (explosive?) discussions were about source releases.
 If you get those right, what ancillary stuff (binaries, -deps
 packages, maven-repo-structured jar directories, ...) you can then
 _also_ have is not so much under discussion I think.

 Looking into ManifoldCF a bit, I think what you need is

 * buildable source release that contains all the source for ManifoldCF
 * source release that contains all the custom patches for the
 dependencies that need patches
 ** you could include the source code, but I'd actually prefer not to do that
 * source release that contains instructions for patching and then
 installing needed dependencies
 ** ideally this is all scripted of course (`build.xml
 install-and-patch-xerces` downloads xerces source release, extracts
 and applies patch, builds jar, copies jar into place, ...), but I
 don't see that as a requirement

 And if you have all that, then yeah, having various binary
 conveniences as well is not much of a discussion.


 cheers,


 Leo

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

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:33 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Our mentor(s) are pushing strongly for a source release (which
 contains the upstream patches), plus a lib release, which is to be
 overlaid on the source release to allow it to build.

 I wouldn't call it strongly, rather as just one possible solution
 that can be implemented in the short term without significant impact
 on the existing codebase. The other alternatives being suggested
 seemed quite a bit more complicated.

 I much preferred a source release and a convenience source+lib release,
 but that caused significant objections, so I gave up.

 My main objection here is that the official source release should be
 readily buildable. If the build instructions are essentially take
 that other package and build it instead, then IMHO in practice that
 other package is the one that's being released.


 It could still be readily buildable because it can just document how
 to overlay the lib folder from the source+lib release onto the src
 only release. In practice probably everyone would just use the
 source+lib release anyway but so what.

 Personally I'd be fine with the source package containing required
 binary dependencies, but since others will likely -1 release
 candidates like that, I don't see how a convenience package like that
 would pass review.


 IMHO given that ManifoldCF is a little unusual that makes sense to me too.

   ...ant


I like the additional instructions idea.

I would love to get a show of hands for a source+lib convenience
release rather than just a pure lib release.  Anyone want to provide a
+1 for this approach, or more importantly, a -1 if you have
significant objections?

Karl

 -
 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: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

It sounds like I wasn't clear enough.

The proposal is for the following release artifacts:

(1) A source-only tar
(2) A source+binary dependencies convenience tar
(3) A binary tar

This is instead of:

(1) A source-only tar
(2) A binary dependencies convenience tar
(3) A binary tar

Hope that helps...  The question is, will Roy (or anyone else) be
unwilling to vote for the first option?

Karl

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 11:00 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 10:33 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Hi,

 On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Our mentor(s) are pushing strongly for a source release (which
 contains the upstream patches), plus a lib release, which is to be
 overlaid on the source release to allow it to build.

 I wouldn't call it strongly, rather as just one possible solution
 that can be implemented in the short term without significant impact
 on the existing codebase. The other alternatives being suggested
 seemed quite a bit more complicated.

 I much preferred a source release and a convenience source+lib release,
 but that caused significant objections, so I gave up.

 My main objection here is that the official source release should be
 readily buildable. If the build instructions are essentially take
 that other package and build it instead, then IMHO in practice that
 other package is the one that's being released.


 It could still be readily buildable because it can just document how
 to overlay the lib folder from the source+lib release onto the src
 only release. In practice probably everyone would just use the
 source+lib release anyway but so what.

 Personally I'd be fine with the source package containing required
 binary dependencies, but since others will likely -1 release
 candidates like that, I don't see how a convenience package like that
 would pass review.


 IMHO given that ManifoldCF is a little unusual that makes sense to me too.

   ...ant


 I like the additional instructions idea.

 I would love to get a show of hands for a source+lib convenience
 release rather than just a pure lib release.  Anyone want to provide a
 +1 for this approach, or more importantly, a -1 if you have
 significant objections?


 Well the documented rules are that releases can't be veto'ed so you
 just need three, but from my reading of all this the main problems are
 the comments from Roy which i expect given the climate in the
 Incubator these days might make three hard to get:

 Organizations or individuals that would be offended by (or prevented
 from receiving) the binaries are fully capable of building their own
 IF and ONLY IF the binaries do not exist in our source packages.

 and

 Our releases are absolutely forbidden to contain anything other than
 the open source code that is in our vcs-of-record

   ...ant

 -
 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: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

Also, making sure the other comments on NOTICEs are addressed as well.

I have gotten extremely confusing advice in this area in the past, and
the available documentation does not help.  I believe I am adhering to
Roy's principles, but before we spin another release candidate, I'd
like it very much if someone with a (hopefully accurate) idea of how
things are supposed to work reviewed our license and notice files.
You can find them here:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/LICENSE.txt
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/NOTICE.txt

Thanks!
Karl

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org wrote:
 Hope that helps...  The question is, will Roy (or anyone else) be
 unwilling to vote for the first option?

 Having been one of the people that commented and started the thread, I feel 
 like I was wearing loose clothing while operating machinery, per Roy's 
 guidance on the source being the thing that is voted on and the other 
 binaries are merely convenience items, I would support the first option.  
 Also, making sure the other comments on NOTICEs are addressed as well.

 Unfortunate that you god dog piled on but hopefully we're all better prepared 
 going forward.

 Matt Hogstrom
 m...@hogstrom.org

 A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day Without Sunshine

 On Apr 3, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Karl Wright wrote:

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

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

Are there still requirements for the source tree in SVN, as far as
having applicable LICENSE and NOTICE files there?  My understanding is
then that the source LICENSE and NOTICE files must reside at the root
level in the SVN tree - which implies that the binary tar/zip build
CANNOT be built from the same root.  Is that correct?

Karl

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Franklin, Matthew B.
mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Karl Wright [mailto:daddy...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 1:24 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question about downloading binaries

Also, making sure the other comments on NOTICEs are addressed as well.

I have gotten extremely confusing advice in this area in the past, and
the available documentation does not help.  I believe I am adhering to
Roy's principles, but before we spin another release candidate, I'd
like it very much if someone with a (hopefully accurate) idea of how
things are supposed to work reviewed our license and notice files.
You can find them here:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/LICENSE.txt
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/NOTICE.txt

 Just looking quickly, the LICENSE file contains a lot of licenses for the 
 jars you were distributing.  For the source release, the ONLY LN 
 attributions needed are the ones for code that you are including in your 
 source.

 If, like many projects, you have no 3rd party source inclusion, the LICENSE 
 file should only contain ASL 2.0 and the NOTICE should have the standard 
 developed at apache note.

 For the binary releases, we have been adding entries for any jars we include, 
 as you have done.  There are a couple of tweaks I would suggest, I propose 
 that you get an agreeable source LN first as I think there is (yet again) a 
 wider discussion to be had regarding convenience binaries...


Thanks!
Karl

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org wrote:
 Hope that helps...  The question is, will Roy (or anyone else) be
 unwilling to vote for the first option?

 Having been one of the people that commented and started the thread, I
feel like I was wearing loose clothing while operating machinery, per Roy's
guidance on the source being the thing that is voted on and the other binaries
are merely convenience items, I would support the first option.  Also, making
sure the other comments on NOTICEs are addressed as well.

 Unfortunate that you god dog piled on but hopefully we're all better
prepared going forward.

 Matt Hogstrom
 m...@hogstrom.org

 A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day Without Sunshine

 On Apr 3, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Karl Wright wrote:

-
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: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

Ok, you can now browse each different build artifact's license,
notice, and readme file at:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/[README.txt,NOTICE.txt,LICENSE.txt]
- source
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/lib-license/[README.txt,NOTICE.txt,LICENSE.txt]
- lib artifact
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/dist-license/[README.txt,NOTICE.txt,LICENSE.txt]
- binary artifact

Please let me know what you think now.

Karl


On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Franklin, Matthew B.
mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Karl Wright [mailto:daddy...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2012 1:24 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question about downloading binaries

Also, making sure the other comments on NOTICEs are addressed as well.

I have gotten extremely confusing advice in this area in the past, and
the available documentation does not help.  I believe I am adhering to
Roy's principles, but before we spin another release candidate, I'd
like it very much if someone with a (hopefully accurate) idea of how
things are supposed to work reviewed our license and notice files.
You can find them here:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/LICENSE.txt
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/NOTICE.txt

 Just looking quickly, the LICENSE file contains a lot of licenses for the 
 jars you were distributing.  For the source release, the ONLY LN 
 attributions needed are the ones for code that you are including in your 
 source.

 If, like many projects, you have no 3rd party source inclusion, the LICENSE 
 file should only contain ASL 2.0 and the NOTICE should have the standard 
 developed at apache note.

 For the binary releases, we have been adding entries for any jars we include, 
 as you have done.  There are a couple of tweaks I would suggest, I propose 
 that you get an agreeable source LN first as I think there is (yet again) a 
 wider discussion to be had regarding convenience binaries...


Thanks!
Karl

On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org wrote:
 Hope that helps...  The question is, will Roy (or anyone else) be
 unwilling to vote for the first option?

 Having been one of the people that commented and started the thread, I
feel like I was wearing loose clothing while operating machinery, per Roy's
guidance on the source being the thing that is voted on and the other binaries
are merely convenience items, I would support the first option.  Also, making
sure the other comments on NOTICEs are addressed as well.

 Unfortunate that you god dog piled on but hopefully we're all better
prepared going forward.

 Matt Hogstrom
 m...@hogstrom.org

 A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day Without Sunshine

 On Apr 3, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Karl Wright wrote:

-
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: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

We use ant.  Ant simply invokes the patch utility, as described here:
http://ant.1045680.n5.nabble.com/Patch-task-td1354764.html

Karl

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
 Karl,

 I hope that you are making this too hard.

 We don't care about the contents of someone else's binaries. If you
 make and deploy a -deps  package of third-party binaries, as a
 convenience for your users, it can contain any strange mixture of
 sources and binaries it contains. If you provide a script to download
 a third-party package, we don't care what it downloads so long as the
 license is acceptable for a dependency.

 I don't follow the logic that prevents you from having a release manager:

 a) retrieve third-part sources
 b) apply your patches from your svn
 c) create -deps bundle
 d) deploy to dist, appropriately marked as 'not an Apache release',

 so long as the third-party material has an acceptable license in the
 first place.

 In case I'm wrong here, I'll ask: what is the build tool of choice for
 ManifoldCF? On the other hand from all of these, perhaps there is, or
 could be, a plugin for that build tool that could implement the
 'patch' utility for you on Windows?



 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Sorry about the list cc'ing - the gmail client is fighting me today.

 To try and clarify, which will take some time I'm afraid:

 (1) The 0.5 version of the ManifoldCF release candidate was rejected
 because the tar contained binary dependencies.  The binary
 dependencies were checked into svn.  This has been standard practice
 for a decade or more for Java projects built with ant, but has now
 been deemed unacceptable.
 (2) In trying to find a solution which would still be convenient but
 not include binaries, we considered supplying ant logic that downloads
 the dependencies on demand.  The download would use binaries from the
 Maven repository, where possible.
 (3) In some cases, there is either no corresponding jar in the Maven
 repository, or there is a jar but it doesn't include critical patches.
 (4) In these cases, we needed to see whether there was another place
 those dependent jars could live.  They were in svn before, so one
 possibility was that they remain there.  Other possibilities include
 putting them into a googlecode repository, or downloading and building
 them as part of the overall build process.



 Hope this helps.
 Karl


 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name 
 wrote:
 Forward to list

 I can't answer your question as it's too abstract.  I don't understand
 what you're trying to do from either infra@ or legal@ perspective.

 Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 12:21:17 -0400:
 'svn patch' exists in 1.7.

 Ok, so that implies that we would create the patched jar by checking
 out the project tag from svn and using svn patch, not by downloading
 the source tarball.  Do you think it is ok to allow svn access as part
 of a project's build process?

 Karl


 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name 
 wrote:
  'svn patch' exists in 1.7.  (and tortoise includes svn.exe as an
  optional component, I hear)
 
  Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 12:05:47 -0400:
  The patches are contained in SVN, yes, but the build process is
  structured to work on Windows as well as Linux, and there isn't a
  standard patch utility on Windows.
 
  We could insist that people only build on Linux, I suppose, but that
  would be a huge inconvenience for a lot of people.
 
  Karl
 
  On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:47 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
   On 2 April 2012 16:36, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
   -- Forwarded message --
   From: Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
   Date: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:35 AM
   Subject: Re: Question about downloading binaries
   To: Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
  
  
   You didn't CC the list
  
   Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:33:56 -0400:
   The patches for the dependencies for the main release are sourced 
   only
   as part of the project in question at this time.  So there is no 
   other
   logical place for them to live.
  
   The project SVN presumably contains the patches?
   If not, it should.
  
   In which case, can't you download the source and apply the patches as
   part of the build process?
  
   This is what the Tomcat project does (though it's not changing code,
   just changing package names to avoid collisions).
  
   Karl
  
   On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Daniel Shahaf 
   d...@daniel.shahaf.name wrote:
Why do they have to be hosted on Apache infrastructure?  The 
Subversion
build depends on a C compiler but we don't host that on ASF 
hardware.
   
Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:16:22 -0400:
Hi folks,
   
As a result of a change in the way Java releases must be 
structured,
we need to be able to download binary

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

Since the 3rd-party material is consumed in source code form, I assume
it must have a source-compatible license.

The releases we patch are:

- commons-httpclient 3.1
- xerces 2.9.1
- jetty 6.1

We also build the jdk1.5 version of hsqldb, which does not require
patching but does require recompilation.

I believe all of these are covered by the Apache 2.0 license.

Karl

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:14 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 2 April 2012 17:53, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
 Karl,

 I hope that you are making this too hard.

 We don't care about the contents of someone else's binaries. If you
 make and deploy a -deps  package of third-party binaries, as a
 convenience for your users, it can contain any strange mixture of
 sources and binaries it contains. If you provide a script to download
 a third-party package, we don't care what it downloads so long as the
 license is acceptable for a dependency.

 I don't follow the logic that prevents you from having a release manager:

 a) retrieve third-part sources
 b) apply your patches from your svn
 c) create -deps bundle
 d) deploy to dist, appropriately marked as 'not an Apache release',

 so long as the third-party material has an acceptable license in the
 first place.

 I would add:

 We should not publish patched builds of source in such a way that they
 can interfere with the normal use of the unpatched source builds.
 This includes (but is not limited to) publishing patched binaries on
 Maven Central (regardless of the groupId) with the original package
 names.

 Since the 3rd-party material is consumed in source code form, I assume
 it must have a source-compatible license.
 I.e. a license which is only normally permitted for binary
 dependencies would I think be excluded for this use case.

 In case I'm wrong here, I'll ask: what is the build tool of choice for
 ManifoldCF? On the other hand from all of these, perhaps there is, or
 could be, a plugin for that build tool that could implement the
 'patch' utility for you on Windows?



 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Sorry about the list cc'ing - the gmail client is fighting me today.

 To try and clarify, which will take some time I'm afraid:

 (1) The 0.5 version of the ManifoldCF release candidate was rejected
 because the tar contained binary dependencies.  The binary
 dependencies were checked into svn.  This has been standard practice
 for a decade or more for Java projects built with ant, but has now
 been deemed unacceptable.
 (2) In trying to find a solution which would still be convenient but
 not include binaries, we considered supplying ant logic that downloads
 the dependencies on demand.  The download would use binaries from the
 Maven repository, where possible.
 (3) In some cases, there is either no corresponding jar in the Maven
 repository, or there is a jar but it doesn't include critical patches.
 (4) In these cases, we needed to see whether there was another place
 those dependent jars could live.  They were in svn before, so one
 possibility was that they remain there.  Other possibilities include
 putting them into a googlecode repository, or downloading and building
 them as part of the overall build process.



 Hope this helps.
 Karl


 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name 
 wrote:
 Forward to list

 I can't answer your question as it's too abstract.  I don't understand
 what you're trying to do from either infra@ or legal@ perspective.

 Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 12:21:17 -0400:
 'svn patch' exists in 1.7.

 Ok, so that implies that we would create the patched jar by checking
 out the project tag from svn and using svn patch, not by downloading
 the source tarball.  Do you think it is ok to allow svn access as part
 of a project's build process?

 Karl


 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name 
 wrote:
  'svn patch' exists in 1.7.  (and tortoise includes svn.exe as an
  optional component, I hear)
 
  Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 12:05:47 -0400:
  The patches are contained in SVN, yes, but the build process is
  structured to work on Windows as well as Linux, and there isn't a
  standard patch utility on Windows.
 
  We could insist that people only build on Linux, I suppose, but that
  would be a huge inconvenience for a lot of people.
 
  Karl
 
  On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:47 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
   On 2 April 2012 16:36, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
   -- Forwarded message --
   From: Daniel Shahaf d...@daniel.shahaf.name
   Date: Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 11:35 AM
   Subject: Re: Question about downloading binaries
   To: Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
  
  
   You didn't CC the list
  
   Karl Wright wrote on Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 11:33:56 -0400:
   The patches for the dependencies for the main release are sourced 
   only
   as part of the project in question at this time.  So

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

Please see below.

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
 Jukka added to 'to'; I need backup here so that I don't push you over a 
 cliff.

 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Since the 3rd-party material is consumed in source code form, I assume
 it must have a source-compatible license.

 The releases we patch are:

 - commons-httpclient 3.1
 - xerces 2.9.1

 Uh, oh. Now we have another problem, since these are your fellow
 Apache people at work.

 Have you submitted patches back to commons and xerces? What sort of
 reaction did you get?


I submitted patches for all the materials.  In the case of httpclient,
the patches were partly accepted and partly rejected - but they are
only available in the 4.x version of the library, which we have not
yet gone to.  The reason is complex; the connectors that would use it
are difficult to test in the absence of available instances of the
kinds of repositories they would be communicating with.  That's a long
standing problem I've been trying to find a solution for for more than
2 years now.

The patches that were rejected involved things that the package
developers considered to be not consistent with mission.  For
example, the xerces change basically allows the parser to accept
broken xml (if a certain configuration switch is enabled).

 Releasing 'convenience binaries' of modified sources of Apache
 projects strikes me as somewhat contrary to the overall goals here.
 I'd like others to weigh in here, but I'd propose that  you always
 ship modified Apache products as source. Forget about 'patch'. Just
 ship modified sources files and drop them into place in fetched copies
 of their releases, and build the results.


I'd love to acheive closure, believe me, and there are open tickets to
this end, but until we do it I don't believe it is wise or feasible to
withhold ManifoldCF from the community.

 As Sebb points out, you really, really, must not push your modified
 binaries to maven central unless you use shade or equivalent to change
 the package names.


I would never do that, obviously.

 I wish that others would weigh in here; how bad an idea is a
 'convenience binary' consisting of a modified Apache project library?

 - jetty 6.1

 As a courtesy to the Jetty project, the same rule of 'don't stick this
 out into maven as a standalone artifact' applies. Otherwise, the
 two-pronged approach is fine: make convenience binaries, and also
 provide the user with the ability to rebuild them for themselves. I'd
 propose the 'whole file replacement' mechanism here as well to solve
 the Windows problem.


Actually it occurred to me that since there are published binary
releases of these artifacts, I can download and unpack those.  So I
think I have a solution for this one.

Karl


 We also build the jdk1.5 version of hsqldb, which does not require
 patching but does require recompilation.

 That's simple enough as a -dep convenience binary.


 I believe all of these are covered by the Apache 2.0 license.

 Karl

 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:14 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 2 April 2012 17:53, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
 Karl,

 I hope that you are making this too hard.

 We don't care about the contents of someone else's binaries. If you
 make and deploy a -deps  package of third-party binaries, as a
 convenience for your users, it can contain any strange mixture of
 sources and binaries it contains. If you provide a script to download
 a third-party package, we don't care what it downloads so long as the
 license is acceptable for a dependency.

 I don't follow the logic that prevents you from having a release manager:

 a) retrieve third-part sources
 b) apply your patches from your svn
 c) create -deps bundle
 d) deploy to dist, appropriately marked as 'not an Apache release',

 so long as the third-party material has an acceptable license in the
 first place.

 I would add:

 We should not publish patched builds of source in such a way that they
 can interfere with the normal use of the unpatched source builds.
 This includes (but is not limited to) publishing patched binaries on
 Maven Central (regardless of the groupId) with the original package
 names.

 Since the 3rd-party material is consumed in source code form, I assume
 it must have a source-compatible license.
 I.e. a license which is only normally permitted for binary
 dependencies would I think be excluded for this use case.

 In case I'm wrong here, I'll ask: what is the build tool of choice for
 ManifoldCF? On the other hand from all of these, perhaps there is, or
 could be, a plugin for that build tool that could implement the
 'patch' utility for you on Windows?



 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Sorry about the list cc'ing - the gmail client is fighting me today.

 To try and clarify, which will take some time I'm afraid:

 (1) The 0.5 version of the ManifoldCF

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

I've created CONNECTORS-443 to describe the current proposal.

Karl

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Please see below.

 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Jukka added to 'to'; I need backup here so that I don't push you over a 
 cliff.

 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Since the 3rd-party material is consumed in source code form, I assume
 it must have a source-compatible license.

 The releases we patch are:

 - commons-httpclient 3.1
 - xerces 2.9.1

 Uh, oh. Now we have another problem, since these are your fellow
 Apache people at work.

 Have you submitted patches back to commons and xerces? What sort of
 reaction did you get?


 I submitted patches for all the materials.  In the case of httpclient,
 the patches were partly accepted and partly rejected - but they are
 only available in the 4.x version of the library, which we have not
 yet gone to.  The reason is complex; the connectors that would use it
 are difficult to test in the absence of available instances of the
 kinds of repositories they would be communicating with.  That's a long
 standing problem I've been trying to find a solution for for more than
 2 years now.

 The patches that were rejected involved things that the package
 developers considered to be not consistent with mission.  For
 example, the xerces change basically allows the parser to accept
 broken xml (if a certain configuration switch is enabled).

 Releasing 'convenience binaries' of modified sources of Apache
 projects strikes me as somewhat contrary to the overall goals here.
 I'd like others to weigh in here, but I'd propose that  you always
 ship modified Apache products as source. Forget about 'patch'. Just
 ship modified sources files and drop them into place in fetched copies
 of their releases, and build the results.


 I'd love to acheive closure, believe me, and there are open tickets to
 this end, but until we do it I don't believe it is wise or feasible to
 withhold ManifoldCF from the community.

 As Sebb points out, you really, really, must not push your modified
 binaries to maven central unless you use shade or equivalent to change
 the package names.


 I would never do that, obviously.

 I wish that others would weigh in here; how bad an idea is a
 'convenience binary' consisting of a modified Apache project library?

 - jetty 6.1

 As a courtesy to the Jetty project, the same rule of 'don't stick this
 out into maven as a standalone artifact' applies. Otherwise, the
 two-pronged approach is fine: make convenience binaries, and also
 provide the user with the ability to rebuild them for themselves. I'd
 propose the 'whole file replacement' mechanism here as well to solve
 the Windows problem.


 Actually it occurred to me that since there are published binary
 releases of these artifacts, I can download and unpack those.  So I
 think I have a solution for this one.

 Karl


 We also build the jdk1.5 version of hsqldb, which does not require
 patching but does require recompilation.

 That's simple enough as a -dep convenience binary.


 I believe all of these are covered by the Apache 2.0 license.

 Karl

 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:14 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 2 April 2012 17:53, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
 Karl,

 I hope that you are making this too hard.

 We don't care about the contents of someone else's binaries. If you
 make and deploy a -deps  package of third-party binaries, as a
 convenience for your users, it can contain any strange mixture of
 sources and binaries it contains. If you provide a script to download
 a third-party package, we don't care what it downloads so long as the
 license is acceptable for a dependency.

 I don't follow the logic that prevents you from having a release manager:

 a) retrieve third-part sources
 b) apply your patches from your svn
 c) create -deps bundle
 d) deploy to dist, appropriately marked as 'not an Apache release',

 so long as the third-party material has an acceptable license in the
 first place.

 I would add:

 We should not publish patched builds of source in such a way that they
 can interfere with the normal use of the unpatched source builds.
 This includes (but is not limited to) publishing patched binaries on
 Maven Central (regardless of the groupId) with the original package
 names.

 Since the 3rd-party material is consumed in source code form, I assume
 it must have a source-compatible license.
 I.e. a license which is only normally permitted for binary
 dependencies would I think be excluded for this use case.

 In case I'm wrong here, I'll ask: what is the build tool of choice for
 ManifoldCF? On the other hand from all of these, perhaps there is, or
 could be, a plugin for that build tool that could implement the
 'patch' utility for you on Windows?



 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Sorry

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

what's the use-case for non-well-formed
XML?' This thread is probably not the best place to delve further in
that direction.

Simple use case: parsing malformed RSS feeds.  I agree, though, we're
getting into the weeds here; I'd love to have this discussion
elsewhere, but the point does stand that none of these patch decisions
was done lightly.  Hopefully the community can accept that.

Karl

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
 Karl,

 I'm exceedingly sorry here that the IPMC as a whole let you down by
 not turning into these issues and dealing with them at the outset.
 There's been a lot of sensitivity expressed lately to Apache projects
 stepping on each other's toes.

 Personally, I have no objection to including mutant jars in a -deps
 binary with a clear explanation of what they are, but I would like to
 see some support for that view, because I'd could imagine some
 objections based on recent email.

 In the longer term, if ManifoldCF really wants to include an XML
 parser with a difference, then it's certainly possible for you to
 maintain and release a fork of Xerces under your own package names. I
 agree with Sebb that you would be well advised to find some other way
 around it. My personal reaction, in complete isolation from the
 problem at hand, was 'really? what's the use-case for non-well-formed
 XML?' This thread is probably not the best place to delve further in
 that direction.

 --benson

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

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

I think the bigger picture here is that resolving differences of this
kind requires time, and during the interim we need to be able to
release software anyway.  I have no wish to maintain a forked copy of
either xerces or httpclient indefinitely, but right at the moment we
are not prepared or able to use the released versions of these
libraries.  I hope that we can all agree that pragmatism has a value;
we're certainly not trying to step on people's toes, we're simply
trying to solve a problem.

Thanks,
Karl


On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 what's the use-case for non-well-formed
 XML?' This thread is probably not the best place to delve further in
 that direction.

 Simple use case: parsing malformed RSS feeds.  I agree, though, we're
 getting into the weeds here; I'd love to have this discussion
 elsewhere, but the point does stand that none of these patch decisions
 was done lightly.  Hopefully the community can accept that.

 Karl

 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Karl,

 I'm exceedingly sorry here that the IPMC as a whole let you down by
 not turning into these issues and dealing with them at the outset.
 There's been a lot of sensitivity expressed lately to Apache projects
 stepping on each other's toes.

 Personally, I have no objection to including mutant jars in a -deps
 binary with a clear explanation of what they are, but I would like to
 see some support for that view, because I'd could imagine some
 objections based on recent email.

 In the longer term, if ManifoldCF really wants to include an XML
 parser with a difference, then it's certainly possible for you to
 maintain and release a fork of Xerces under your own package names. I
 agree with Sebb that you would be well advised to find some other way
 around it. My personal reaction, in complete isolation from the
 problem at hand, was 'really? what's the use-case for non-well-formed
 XML?' This thread is probably not the best place to delve further in
 that direction.

 --benson

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

Re: Question about downloading binaries

[Karl Wright]

Whether it is necessary is another matter, and is not easy to answer
in general as it depends.

I'm going to treat this as unnecessary, because we were extremely
careful to maintain backwards compatibility when writing the changes.

Karl

On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 6:59 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 2 April 2012 22:45, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 I think the bigger picture here is that resolving differences of this
 kind requires time, and during the interim we need to be able to
 release software anyway.  I have no wish to maintain a forked copy of
 either xerces or httpclient indefinitely, but right at the moment we
 are not prepared or able to use the released versions of these
 libraries.  I hope that we can all agree that pragmatism has a value;
 we're certainly not trying to step on people's toes, we're simply
 trying to solve a problem.

 One sure way to solve the problem is to use your own package namespace
 for any such imported source.

 That is definitely sufficient.

 Whether it is necessary is another matter, and is not easy to answer
 in general as it depends.

 Thanks,
 Karl


 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 what's the use-case for non-well-formed
 XML?' This thread is probably not the best place to delve further in
 that direction.

 Simple use case: parsing malformed RSS feeds.  I agree, though, we're
 getting into the weeds here; I'd love to have this discussion
 elsewhere, but the point does stand that none of these patch decisions
 was done lightly.  Hopefully the community can accept that.

 Karl

 On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Karl,

 I'm exceedingly sorry here that the IPMC as a whole let you down by
 not turning into these issues and dealing with them at the outset.
 There's been a lot of sensitivity expressed lately to Apache projects
 stepping on each other's toes.

 Personally, I have no objection to including mutant jars in a -deps
 binary with a clear explanation of what they are, but I would like to
 see some support for that view, because I'd could imagine some
 objections based on recent email.

 In the longer term, if ManifoldCF really wants to include an XML
 parser with a difference, then it's certainly possible for you to
 maintain and release a fork of Xerces under your own package names. I
 agree with Sebb that you would be well advised to find some other way
 around it. My personal reaction, in complete isolation from the
 problem at hand, was 'really? what's the use-case for non-well-formed
 XML?' This thread is probably not the best place to delve further in
 that direction.

 --benson

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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me (binding).
Karl

On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Shinichiro Abe
shinichiro.ab...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello Incubator IPMC,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0.
 This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 You can find the artifact at
 http://people.apache.org/~shinichiro/apache-manifoldcf-0.5-incubating-RC0/, or
 in svn at 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.5-incubating-RC0/.

 Thanks in advance!
 Shinichiro Abe
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org


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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0

[Karl Wright]

How's this for a diff to address the LICENSE.txt problem:

Index: LICENSE.txt
===
--- LICENSE.txt (revision 1304322)
+++ LICENSE.txt (working copy)
@@ -230,15 +230,19 @@

 This product includes a jaxb-impl.jar.
 License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
(https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
+Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

 This product includes a saaj-impl.jar.
 License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
(https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
+Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

 This product includes a streambuffer.jar.
 License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
(https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
+Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

 This product includes a jaxws-rt.jar.
 License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
(https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
+Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

 This product includes an activation.jar.
 License: Common Development And Distribution License (CDDL) Version
1.0  (http://www.sun.com/cddl/cddl.html)
@@ -248,15 +252,18 @@

 This product includes a jsr181-api.jar.
 License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
(https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
+Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

 This product includes a jaxb-api.jar.
 License: Common Development And Distribution License (CDDL) Version
1.0  (http://www.sun.com/cddl/cddl.html)

 This product includes a saaj-api.jar.
 License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
(https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
+Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

 This product includes a jaxws-api.jar.
 License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
(https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
+Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

 This product includes a mimepull.jar.
 License: COMMON DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRIBUTION LICENSE (CDDL) Version
1.0  (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/cddl1.php)License: GPLv2
with classpath exception
(http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html)
@@ -275,6 +282,7 @@

 This product includes a h2-1.3.158.jar.
 License: Dual; MPL 1.1 (http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/), and Eclipse
Public License 1.0 (http://opensource.org/licenses/eclipse-1.0.php)
+Jar included under terms of EPL 1.0.

 This product includes a xmlsec-1.4.1.jar.
 License: Apache 2  (http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt)


Karl


On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:24 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 26 March 2012 02:38, Shinichiro Abe shinichiro.ab...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello Incubator IPMC,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0.
 This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 You can find the artifact at
 http://people.apache.org/~shinichiro/apache-manifoldcf-0.5-incubating-RC0/, 
 or
 in svn at 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.5-incubating-RC0/.

 The NOTICE file says:
 Apache ManifoldCF
 Copyright 2010-2011 The Apache Software Foundation

 The LICENSE file includes references to lots of jars that are dual
 licensed under CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2.
 However, there is no indication which license has been chosen by the project.

 I think this is a blocker.

 Thanks in advance!
 Shinichiro Abe
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org


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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0

[Karl Wright]

Thanks for the review.

Build with maven requires running mvn-bootstrap script first.
Primary build is ant.  This is described in the documentation.

License notices have been released 4 previous times in this form and
were based originally on Solr/Lucene, which included many of the same
dependencies, but as modified by the requirements of the incubator.
We were explicitly instructed by the incubator (I'd be happy to look
up the thread if desired) to remove everything not absolutely
essential from the NOTICE.txt file (leaving only those licenses that
required explicit notification), and instead to move the others to the
LICENSE.txt file, where you will find proper attribution for all jars
distributed with the project.  We complied with this request, which we
can now undo if it is the consensus that we should.

Thanks again,
Karl

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org wrote:
 Some comments:

 The NOTICEs file does not indicate that there is software from outside the 
 ASF...  for instance, Jetty is a Codehaus project.  Same license, different 
 org.  Here is what Geronimo does:  
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/tags/2.1.4/NOTICE.txt

 The code signing Key is not available online:
 gpg: requesting key 0CF24209 from hkp server minsky.surfnet.nl
 gpgkeys: key 516B70640CF24209 not found on keyserver

 Imported the keys from 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/trunk/KEYS  and the signatures 
 were fine.  Would be nice if they were signed by others and were published; 
 that's a nit.

 Tried building (mvn compile) and received the following:

 [INFO] Reactor Summary:
 [INFO]
 [INFO] ManifoldCF  SUCCESS [0.491s]
 [INFO] ManifoldCF - Framework  SUCCESS [0.018s]
 [INFO] ManifoldCF - Framework - Core . FAILURE [0.055s]
 [INFO] ManifoldCF - Framework - UI Core .. SKIPPED
 [ snip ]
 [ERROR] Failed to execute goal on project mcf-core: Could not resolve 
 dependencies for project org.apache.manifoldcf:mcf-core:jar:0.5.0-SNAPSHOT: 
 Failure to find com.bitmechanic:jdbcpool:jar:0.99 in 
 http://repo1.maven.org/maven2 was cached in the local repository, resolution 
 will not be reattempted until the update interval of central has elapsed or 
 updates are forced - [Help 1]



 Matt Hogstrom
 m...@hogstrom.org

 A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day Without Sunshine

 On Mar 25, 2012, at 9:38 PM, Shinichiro Abe wrote:

 Hello Incubator IPMC,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0.
 This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 You can find the artifact at
 http://people.apache.org/~shinichiro/apache-manifoldcf-0.5-incubating-RC0/, 
 or
 in svn at 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.5-incubating-RC0/.

 Thanks in advance!
 Shinichiro Abe
 -
 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: Simplifying podling infra

[Karl Wright]

A big +1 from me.  It's a royal pain in the rear to move so much stuff
around just because of graduation.

Karl

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:52 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 Currently new podlings have most of their infrastructure (lists, web
 site, svn, etc.) set up under incubator.apache.org and
 repos/asf/incubator. As a consequence they need to perform an extra
 infrastructure migration when they graduate. IMHO that's one infra
 migration too much.

 Would it make sense for us to allow podlings to be set up at their
 expected TLP locations right from the beginning? The IPMC would still
 be ultimately responsible for overseeing all these locations and we'd
 still expect the standard incubator disclaimers to be in place (we
 might even ask for extra ones in list footers, etc. if needed). If a
 podling ends up being retired or graduating into a subproject of
 another TLP, then an extra migration step would still be needed but
 the difference to status quo would be minimal.

 The downside of this change would be that the term incubator would
 become less prominent in the day-to-day operations of a podling. The
 upside would be reduced infra overhead, less community trouble caused
 by migrations and simplified incubation documentation (no need to
 distinguish between podling and TLP state in so many places).

 WDYT? If there's interest (and not many objections), we could try out
 the idea with a few upcoming podlings to see how it works in practice.

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

 -
 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

[WITHDRAW][VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0

[Karl Wright]

Withdrawing the release candidate from consideration in order to
address sebb's blocking license/notice issues.

Karl

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:24 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 26 March 2012 02:38, Shinichiro Abe shinichiro.ab...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello Incubator IPMC,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0.
 This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 You can find the artifact at
 http://people.apache.org/~shinichiro/apache-manifoldcf-0.5-incubating-RC0/, 
 or
 in svn at 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.5-incubating-RC0/.

 The NOTICE file says:
 Apache ManifoldCF
 Copyright 2010-2011 The Apache Software Foundation

 The LICENSE file includes references to lots of jars that are dual
 licensed under CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2.
 However, there is no indication which license has been chosen by the project.

 I think this is a blocker.

 Thanks in advance!
 Shinichiro Abe
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org


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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0

[Karl Wright]

Some clarifications:

Hi Roy,

(1) Our LICENSE.txt file currently contains references to all
non-Apache jars that we redistribute, and a reference or description
of the licensing of that jar.  We do not attempt to relicense
anything.  No shared release process is involved for any third-party
jar we redistribute.  The actual text we include is typically
something like this:

This product includes a jaxb-impl.jar.
License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
(https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

(2) The purpose for including the above is to clarify the terms under
which we believe that we are able to redistribute those jars.
Therefore I don't think Sebb's request is unreasonable.  If you
believe that this information is in the wrong place, then please let
us know where it should go.  As I've said before, we're not doing
things any differently than most other Apache projects.

Please clarify your recommendations.

Thanks,
Karl


On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
 On Mar 26, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
 On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:24 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 26 March 2012 02:38, Shinichiro Abe shinichiro.ab...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello Incubator IPMC,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0.
 This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 You can find the artifact at
 http://people.apache.org/~shinichiro/apache-manifoldcf-0.5-incubating-RC0/,
  or
 in svn at 
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.5-incubating-RC0/.

 The NOTICE file says:
 Apache ManifoldCF
 Copyright 2010-2011 The Apache Software Foundation

 The LICENSE file includes references to lots of jars that are dual
 licensed under CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2.
 However, there is no indication which license has been chosen by the 
 project.

 I think this is a blocker.

 A project does not choose a license.  The license is provided by the copyright
 owner.  We do not change that license, nor do we reduce the number of the
 available licenses to choose from, for downstream recipients.  Therefore,
 it doesn't make any sense to indicate which one is chosen.

 In any case, the indicated artifacts are only included in binary packages.
 We don't release binaries, so none of these licenses belong in our source
 product's LICENSE file.  We need to be clear that the source code package
 does not include these dependencies.  They only exist in binary distributions.

 If the project constructs binary distributions via a shared process, then
 the LICENSE/NOTICE files for those distribution packages need to be 
 constructed
 as well --- either by appending a separate file (that contains just the
 licenses/notices that are added for the binary package) or by maintaining a
 separate LICENSE/NOTICE set for the binary package.

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0

[Karl Wright]

We distribute binaries with the source distribution as well.
Otherwise it is not possible to build the source.  This too is similar
to Lucene and Solr.

I am curious as to when it became a requirement that source and binary
distributions have independent LICENSE and NOTICE files.

Thanks,
Karl

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Roy T. Fielding field...@gbiv.com wrote:
 On Mar 26, 2012, at 5:36 PM, Karl Wright wrote:

 Some clarifications:

 Hi Roy,

 (1) Our LICENSE.txt file currently contains references to all
 non-Apache jars that we redistribute, and a reference or description
 of the licensing of that jar.  We do not attempt to relicense
 anything.  No shared release process is involved for any third-party
 jar we redistribute.  The actual text we include is typically
 something like this:

 This product includes a jaxb-impl.jar.
 License: Dual license consisting of the CDDL v1.0 and GPL v2
 (https://glassfish.dev.java.net/public/CDDL+GPL.html)
 Jar included under terms of CDDL v1.0 license.

 (2) The purpose for including the above is to clarify the terms under
 which we believe that we are able to redistribute those jars.
 Therefore I don't think Sebb's request is unreasonable.  If you
 believe that this information is in the wrong place, then please let
 us know where it should go.  As I've said before, we're not doing
 things any differently than most other Apache projects.

 Please clarify your recommendations.

 I had two separate comments, neither of which are intended as
 a criticism of ManifoldCF.

 First, Sebb's request is reasonable; it just happens to be wrong.
 No Apache project needs to say Jar included under terms of
 CDDL v1.0 license.  A project might choose to say that, but
 it is nonsense, and certainly isn't a requirement of incubation.

 Second, Apache projects only release SOURCE.  We don't release
 third party binaries, period.  Hence, the specific examples that
 you provided are not valid for a release LICENSE.  They might be
 valid for the license file included within a binary package, but
 please note that such a license file will be different from the
 LICENSE that is provided in the source distribution, and is not
 something we would be voting upon (because no PMC can be expected
 to verify the validity of those binaries).  Hence, what you need
 to do is split the LICENSE in two -- one for source packages (that
 do not include dependent jars) and one for binary packages (that
 do include the dependent jars).

 Hopefully, Jukka can step in and document how the LICENSE and
 NOTICE files are crafted for Jackrabbit and Sling, since those
 projects have the exact same issues regarding third-party libraries
 that are only included in the binary packages.

 Roy

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0

[Karl Wright]

Policy is that binaries are not endorsed by the ASF. 

I don't think anyone said anything differently.

There is a huge difference between endorsing a third-party binary and
distributing it.  But if I misunderstand and it is Apache's policy
that we don't distribute any third-party binaries then we have a huge
problem - indeed, I can't see how Apache can ship much of anything
with that constraint.  At the very minimum it should be written up
somewhere, and projects like Lucene/Solr should be whipped into line
because they've been doing this for close to a decade now, and there's
a whole body of Apache materials describing just what third-party
licensed materials can be distributed that should simply be thrown
away.

Karl


On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
 On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org wrote:
 My point is that if push came to shove, legally, I think the -bin objects
 would be considered a distribution.

 I disagree.  The ASF only releases source.

 If I understand correctly, changing that position undermines the
 indemnification protections that have been painstakingly set up by Roy and
 others.

 Policy is that binaries are not endorsed by the ASF.  If you wish to
 change that policy and secure the backing of the ASF for binaries (which I
 will oppose), this doesn't seem like the right venue to make such a
 proposal.

 If the policy of source-only releases is confusing to some of our Java
 developers, perhaps we should revisit how we vet incubating releases of Java
 projects to emphasize this policy.

 Marvin Humphrey

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Rave 0.8-incubating

[Karl Wright]

I'll have a look at it.  Stay tuned...
Karl

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Franklin, Matthew B.
mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:
 We still need one more IPMC member vote for the release.  Does anyone have
 time to take a look?

 Thanks in advance,
 -Matt

 On 2/12/12 9:29 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:

This is the seventh incubator release for Apache Rave, with the artifacts
being versioned as 0.8-incubating.

We are requesting at least one additional IPMC member vote, as we have
received 2 binding IPMC +1 votes during the release voting on rave-dev -

VOTE: http://s.apache.org/U8G
RESULT: http://s.apache.org/Fcv

IPMC member votes from the rave-dev list:
Ate Douma:   +1
Ross Gardler: +1

Release notes:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/tags/0.8-incubating/CHANGEL
O
G

SVN source tag (r1163402):
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/rave-master-pom/tags/0.8-i
n
cubating/

SVN source tag (r1163411):
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/tags/0.8-incubating/

Maven staging repos:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/

Source releases:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/org/a
p
ache/rave/rave-master/0.8-incubating/rave-master-0.8-incubating-source-rel
e
ase.zip
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/org/a
p
ache/rave/rave-project/0.8-incubating/rave-project-0.8-incubating-source-r
e
lease.zip

Binary releases
http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/rave/0.8-incubating/apache-rave-
0
.8-incubating-bin.tar.gz
http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/rave/0.8-incubating/apache-rave-
0
.8-incubating-bin.zip

PGP release keys:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/KEYS

Vote open for 72 hours.

[ ] +1  approve
[ ] +0  no opinion
[ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)








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




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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Rave 0.8-incubating

[Karl Wright]

What is the license on ecj-3.7.jar (Eclipse JDT Java compiler)?  If
you are going to redistribute it you should provide that info
somewhere unless it's Apache licensed.

Thanks,
Karl


On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 I'll have a look at it.  Stay tuned...
 Karl

 On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Franklin, Matthew B.
 mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:
 We still need one more IPMC member vote for the release.  Does anyone have
 time to take a look?

 Thanks in advance,
 -Matt

 On 2/12/12 9:29 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. mfrank...@mitre.org wrote:

This is the seventh incubator release for Apache Rave, with the artifacts
being versioned as 0.8-incubating.

We are requesting at least one additional IPMC member vote, as we have
received 2 binding IPMC +1 votes during the release voting on rave-dev -

VOTE: http://s.apache.org/U8G
RESULT: http://s.apache.org/Fcv

IPMC member votes from the rave-dev list:
Ate Douma:   +1
Ross Gardler: +1

Release notes:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/tags/0.8-incubating/CHANGEL
O
G

SVN source tag (r1163402):
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/rave-master-pom/tags/0.8-i
n
cubating/

SVN source tag (r1163411):
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/tags/0.8-incubating/

Maven staging repos:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/

Source releases:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/org/a
p
ache/rave/rave-master/0.8-incubating/rave-master-0.8-incubating-source-rel
e
ase.zip
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/org/a
p
ache/rave/rave-project/0.8-incubating/rave-project-0.8-incubating-source-r
e
lease.zip

Binary releases
http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/rave/0.8-incubating/apache-rave-
0
.8-incubating-bin.tar.gz
http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/rave/0.8-incubating/apache-rave-
0
.8-incubating-bin.zip

PGP release keys:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/KEYS

Vote open for 72 hours.

[ ] +1  approve
[ ] +0  no opinion
[ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)








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




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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Rave 0.8-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Thanks - I did not realize that the source LICENSE and the binary
LICENSE were different. ;-)

+1 from me (binding)
Karl


On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Ate Douma a...@douma.nu wrote:
 On 02/16/2012 04:05 PM, Karl Wright wrote:

 What is the license on ecj-3.7.jar (Eclipse JDT Java compiler)?  If
 you are going to redistribute it you should provide that info
 somewhere unless it's Apache licensed.


 The ecj is EPL 1.0 license, and explicitly mentioned and covered in the root
 LICENSE file of the binary distribution.



 Thanks,
 Karl


 On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Karl Wrightdaddy...@gmail.com  wrote:

 I'll have a look at it.  Stay tuned...
 Karl

 On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Franklin, Matthew B.
 mfrank...@mitre.org  wrote:

 We still need one more IPMC member vote for the release.  Does anyone
 have
 time to take a look?

 Thanks in advance,
 -Matt

 On 2/12/12 9:29 PM, Franklin, Matthew B.mfrank...@mitre.org  wrote:

 This is the seventh incubator release for Apache Rave, with the
 artifacts
 being versioned as 0.8-incubating.

 We are requesting at least one additional IPMC member vote, as we have
 received 2 binding IPMC +1 votes during the release voting on rave-dev
 -

 VOTE: http://s.apache.org/U8G
 RESULT: http://s.apache.org/Fcv

 IPMC member votes from the rave-dev list:
 Ate Douma:   +1
 Ross Gardler: +1

 Release notes:

 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/tags/0.8-incubating/CHANGEL
 O
 G

 SVN source tag (r1163402):

 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/rave-master-pom/tags/0.8-i
 n
 cubating/

 SVN source tag (r1163411):
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/tags/0.8-incubating/

 Maven staging repos:
 https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/

 Source releases:

 https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/org/a
 p

 ache/rave/rave-master/0.8-incubating/rave-master-0.8-incubating-source-rel
 e
 ase.zip

 https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacherave-195/org/a
 p

 ache/rave/rave-project/0.8-incubating/rave-project-0.8-incubating-source-r
 e
 lease.zip

 Binary releases

 http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/rave/0.8-incubating/apache-rave-
 0
 .8-incubating-bin.tar.gz

 http://people.apache.org/builds/incubator/rave/0.8-incubating/apache-rave-
 0
 .8-incubating-bin.zip

 PGP release keys:
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rave/KEYS

 Vote open for 72 hours.

 [ ] +1  approve
 [ ] +0  no opinion
 [ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)








 -
 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



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


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

Re: [VOTE] Jukka Zitting for IPMC Chair (was Re: NOMINATIONS for Incubator PMC Chair)

[Karl Wright]

+1 (binding)

Karl Wright

On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Michael McCandless
luc...@mikemccandless.com wrote:
 +1 (binding)

 Mike McCandless

 http://blog.mikemccandless.com

 On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
 Hi Folks,

 OK there has been enough discussion here. It's time to VOTE for a new IPMC
 chair and it looks like the remaining folks (including me) that were in the 
 running
 have aligned beyond the following nominee: Jukka Zitting. Suffice to say, he 
 was
 *my first choice* :)

 In the interest of moving the current discussion matters forward, please VOTE
 on this recommendation to the board by the IPMC. I'll leave the VOTE open
 for at least the next 72 hours:

 [ ] +1 Recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position.
 [ ] +0 Don't care.
 [ ]  -1 Don't recommend Jukka Zitting for the IPMC chair position because...

 Note that only VOTEs from the Incubator PMC members are binding, but
 all are welcome to voice their opinion and it will be recorded in the final
 tallies.

 Finally, just to note, these VOTEs on personnel are normally the only
 thing in Apache that is discussed in private (human/social issues), but
 in the interest of openness and transparency that has been demonstrated
 here during these discussions, I will hold this VOTE on the public list.

 Thanks!

 Cheers,
 Chris

 P.S. Here's my +1. Thanks buddy.

 On Feb 8, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:

 I am happy to step out of the way for Jukka. He was clever enough to
 stay out of the email s*** storm, and that alone, in my mind, renders
 him most qualified.

 On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 I already mentioned that I would have nominated you, and so I am
 delighted to read your message. It will be very difficult to choose
 between all these strong candidates.

 Cheers

 On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com 
 wrote:
 Hi,

 After consideration and some convincing (thanks!), I've decided to
 throw also my hat into the ring as a candidate to be the next chairman
 of the IPMC.

 I believe in that role I could be more effective in focusing more of
 our collective attention at where I think it would do most good - at
 the actual podlings we're here to help.

 That said, the current incubation process clearly has problems and I
 very much support efforts to improve the way we work (even if the
 result is to replace the Incubator with something better). However,
 I'd like to leave the leadership on these efforts to others and, as
 mentioned elsewhere, rather try to act as a balancing force that helps
 achieve consensus where possible.

 Should I be elected, I'd resign as the chairman of the Jackrabbit PMC.
 In fact I think it's in any case high time for Jackrabbit to be
 rotating that role.

 Finally, if elected (and assuming the IPMC still exists), I'd serve
 for at most two years before calling for a re-election, or possibly
 much less if I don't find enough free cycles to perform the duty as
 well as it should.

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting



 ++
 Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
 Senior Computer Scientist
 NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
 Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov
 WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
 ++
 Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
 University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
 ++


 -
 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][RESULT] Hitoshi Ozawa as committer

[Karl Wright]

FYI


-- Forwarded message --
From: Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Hitoshi Ozawa as committer
To: connectors-priv...@incubator.apache.org


Oh, and I'm supposed to also tally which IPMC members voted in favor.
There were three IPMC members voting +1: Jukka, Tommaso, and Karl.

Karl


On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Six +1's, 72 hours.  Vote passes.
 Karl

 On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:52 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Please vote on whether to ask Hitoshi Ozawa to become a ManifoldCF 
 committer.

 +1

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

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

Re: Evolution instead of a revolution (Was: Time to vote the chair?)

[Karl Wright]

+1 on this.  Work the bugs out before everyone transitions.

Karl

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 [Forking a new thread thread to make this easier to track.]

 On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
 http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IncubatorDeconstructionProposal

 As already mentioned by others, instead of deconstructing everything
 in one go, wouldn't it make more sense to gradually shift into a new
 way of doing things?

 You're proposing that podlings should start as full TLPs (with ASF
 members on board for mentoring) right from the beginning. Instead of
 changing the rules on all podlings at the same time, how about we try
 this out by giving interested podlings (or new proposals) this direct
 to TLP option?

 If that works out better than the current Incubator model, we can stop
 accepting more old-style podlings and just direct them into TLPs right
 from the beginning. Meanwhile any existing podlings should have a
 chance to graduate under the existing rules unless they rather choose
 to use this direct to TLP option.

 If as a result there's no more podlings in the Incubator, that's IMHO
 then the right time to shut down the IPMC, not before. And if it turns
 out that the proposed new model doesn't work as expected, we still
 have the current processes and structures to fall back to.

 The current Incubator model certainly has flaws, but it also does a
 lot of things right. There are good reasons for things like the extra
 publicity and release constraints placed on podlings, and the proposed
 model doesn't address how such restrictions would still work without
 the incubator. I note that many of the original constraints of the
 Incubator (no releases, etc.) turned out to be unnecessarily strict in
 practice, so it could well be that everything will work out smoothly
 also without the extra red tape. But small, reversible steps into such
 unknown territory are clearly preferable to major leaps of faith.

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Apparently, I'm now a member of the IPMC.

+1 from me. ;-)

Karl

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 One more binding vote needed for this subpackage.  Please somebody vote!

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Hello incubator,

 We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
 system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
 the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
 We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

 Karl


 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
 Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
 Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
 apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
 To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


 Hi,

 +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

 I checked the
 apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
 package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
 Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
 package, just statically review it.

 One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
 is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
 crypto code, we should remove the Cryptographic Software Notice
 entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
 in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

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



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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me (binding).

Karl

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 We need one more binding IPMC vote for this sub-package.  Any takers?
 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

 On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hello incubator,
 
  We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
  system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
  the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
  We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
 
  Karl
 
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
  Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
  Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
  0.1-incubating
  To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
 
 
  Hi,
  +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
  I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
  package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
  See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.
 
  BR,
  Jukka Zitting

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



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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me (binding).

Karl

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 With Tommaso's and Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We still need one
 more binding IPMC vote for this subpackage.

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

 On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hello incubator,
 
  We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
  system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
  the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
  We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
 
  Karl
 
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
  Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
  0.1-incubating
  To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
 
 
  Hi,
 
  +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
 
  I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
  package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.
 
  Some comments, none blocking:
 
  * The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
  for the release.
  * The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
  troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
  svn tree.
  * Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
  of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
  ManifoldCF dependencies.
 
  [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html
 
  BR,
 
  Jukka Zitting

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



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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me (binding).
Karl

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 With Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We need one more...

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2012/1/4 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Hello Incubator IPMC,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.4-incubating,
 RC2.  This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 You can find the artifact at
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright/apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, or
 in svn at
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.4-incubating-RC2
 .
  Thanks in advance!

 Karl


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

[RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Three binding +1's, 72 hours, vote passes.
Karl

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Apparently, I'm now a member of the IPMC.

 +1 from me. ;-)

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 One more binding vote needed for this subpackage.  Please somebody vote!

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Hello incubator,

 We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
 system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
 the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
 We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

 Karl


 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
 Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
 Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
 apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
 To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


 Hi,

 +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

 I checked the
 apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
 package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
 Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
 package, just statically review it.

 One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
 is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
 crypto code, we should remove the Cryptographic Software Notice
 entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
 in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

 -
 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

[RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Three binding +1's, 72 hours, vote passes.

Karl

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1 from me (binding).

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 We need one more binding IPMC vote for this sub-package.  Any takers?
 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

 On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hello incubator,
 
  We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
  system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
  the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
  We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
 
  Karl
 
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
  Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
  Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
  0.1-incubating
  To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
 
 
  Hi,
  +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
  I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
  package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
  See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.
 
  BR,
  Jukka Zitting

 -
 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

[RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Three binding +1's, 72 hours, vote passes.
Karl

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1 from me (binding).

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 With Tommaso's and Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We still need one
 more binding IPMC vote for this subpackage.

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

 On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hello incubator,
 
  We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
  system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
  the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
  We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
 
  Karl
 
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
  Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
  0.1-incubating
  To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
 
 
  Hi,
 
  +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
 
  I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
  package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.
 
  Some comments, none blocking:
 
  * The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
  for the release.
  * The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
  troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
  svn tree.
  * Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
  of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
  ManifoldCF dependencies.
 
  [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html
 
  BR,
 
  Jukka Zitting

 -
 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

[RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Three binding +1's, 72 hours, vote passes.

Karl

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1 from me (binding).
 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 With Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We need one more...

 Karl

 On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Tommaso Teofili
 tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2012/1/4 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Hello Incubator IPMC,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.4-incubating,
 RC2.  This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 You can find the artifact at
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright/apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, or
 in svn at
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.4-incubating-RC2
 .
  Thanks in advance!

 Karl


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

Re: Incubator, or Incubation?

[Karl Wright]

I like this general direction as well; seems much more manageable.  +1.
Karl

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 6:52 PM, Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote:
 Hey folks,

 I just wanted to chime in with a +1 for the general direction. I think
 there's actually a lot of work to do to iron out how to reorganize
 things. Before digging in, I suggest we abstract out a little bit to
 see if we have consensus on the overall goals and desired end state
 before starting to debate the details, or the process by which to get
 there.

 1) There are people who produce guides, rules and policy that describe
 the incubation process. These rules are then imposed on other groups
 at apache by board decree.
 2) At any point in time, there shall be many groups of people
 following the incubation process.
 3) There is a mechanism in place to provide oversight over all the
 different ongoing incubations.
 4) The differences between communities going through incubation and
 those that aren't is clear and understood by all (including end users,
 press, etc).

 I think the above invariants describe both incubation as of yesterday
 and incubation as of tomorrow. But, we have some issues with the
 current incubator.

 a) The volume of incubation activity has grown such that oversight is 
 difficult.
 b) Large group sizes (particularly general@ and IPMC roster) make
 accountability and consensus-building difficult.
 c) meritocracy is hampered by having the people doing the work not
 having binding votes on their own work.
 d) ... add your own similar issues ...

 The basic realization is that combining all the people from 1) and 2)
 into effectively one big group [1] is no longer the best idea.

 So, we want to redesign how we organize into groups, and associated
 with that we want to tune our oversight mechanisms.

 The basic idea is to split the current single really big group that is
 the incubator into smaller groups that still cooperate and discuss and
 whatnot, but are accountable and overseen separately. These smaller
 groups become their own committees with their own VPs that report to
 the Board.

 Is that a reasonable re-statement of the abstract idea? Is that
 something we can all get behind?

 The next steps then involve deciding just how to split things up.
 Since I'm off to go skiing tomorrow I won't be around next week to
 participate in the details of all that. Have fun :-)

 cheerio,

 Leo

 [1] the choice of the vague term 'group' is intentional: give us some
 degrees of freedom to design the structure, in a formal *and* an
 informal sense. One kind of group is a PMC, but there's also another
 kind of group which is people subscribed to a mailing list and
 another one people that read the stuff that's on the mailing list
 and another which is people who feel responsible for what's going on
 on that mailing list, etc.

 On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 11:25 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@apache.org wrote:
 On 1/31/2012 5:05 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:

 On Jan 31, 2012, at 1:28 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

 Having said that, I should note that the context of Incubator is
 significantly different than a normal PMC.  If incubator wants to structure
 itself more like a board and less like a project, I really don't have
 much to say against that.  Note that it should effect all of the decision
 guidelines that give veto power, not just personnel decisions.

 Isn't that the problem right now though? Like it or not, the Incubator PMC
 has evolved into a mini-board, in the worse sense of the word. You guys
 have a monthly meeting via telecon; an agenda; a set of action items, and
 you still don't get everything that you want to get done, done.

 A very small percentage of folks within the IPMC actually maintain that type
 of board-like oversight over its podlings. And thus, because of that, the 
 more
 I think about it, quite honestly, I don't know what the Incubator PMC is 
 doing
 other than delay the inveitable eventuality that many of these projects will
 graduate and become TLPs and thus the board's problem; whereas many
 of them will not graduate, and become not Apache's problem. We have an
 Attic for projects that make it to TLP for that. Heck, we have SVN and could
 even reboot Incubator dead projects if a group of individuals came along
 and wanted to maintain the code.

 My conclusion from all the ruckus recently has been that the Incubator PMC
 is nothing more than an Incubator mailing list where many ASF veterans
 and those that care about the foundation discuss (and sometimes argue)
 about the foundation's policies and interpretations of law that not even 
 lawyers
 are perfect at -- we're all human yet we try and get on our high horse here
 and act like we speak in absolutes and the will of one or a small subset is
 the will of the many when we all know that in the end, if it's not fun 
 anymore,
 we wouldn't be here.

 What would be so bad about saying that the Incubator, over its existence,
 has served its purpose and 

Re: Incubator, or Incubation?

[Karl Wright]

I don't think one approach precludes the other.  Agreed that incubator
needs to keep going in the interim.  Perhaps we can spin off groups
one at a time, starting with just one to get the bugs worked out?

Karl

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 8:13 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
 On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 12:52:33AM +0100, Leo Simons wrote:
 The basic idea is to split the current single really big group that is
 the incubator into smaller groups that still cooperate and discuss and
 whatnot, but are accountable and overseen separately. These smaller
 groups become their own committees with their own VPs that report to
 the Board.

 Is that a reasonable re-statement of the abstract idea? Is that
 something we can all get behind?

 Completing such a task will be a lot of work, and who knows what complications
 and disagreements lie ahead?  We have an incremental solution in front of us
 which mitigates some of our most pressing problems: the measured expansion of
 Joe Schaefer's successful experiment to add PPMC Members who have
 demonstrated a thorough understanding of the Apache Way to the IPMC.

 I don't support this boil-the-ocean revamp if it blocks the less ambitious
 reforms.  An indefinite period where release votes continue to drag on for
 weeks is unacceptable.

 Marvin Humphrey


 -
 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: PPMC to IPMC

[Karl Wright]

My opinion: It's one thing to try to involve yourself in the fortunes
of one or two projects in addition to your own, and be willing to
provide general opinions, and be willing to contribute content to the
incubator's policy pages.  But the incubator is so huge these days and
so diverse that just keeping track of the current issues could become
a major timesink.  And there's no obvious mechanism for drawing a
line, limiting contributions to bite-sized pieces, and keeping
involvement to a manageable level.  Although, I haven't checked out
JIRA for the incubator; maybe that's a good place to start?

Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:


 From: Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
To: Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
Cc: general@incubator.apache.org general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: PPMC to IPMC

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:41:32PM -0800, Joe Schaefer wrote:
 Taking a larger interest beyond a podling is nice but not required for IPMC
 membership.

+1, not a requirement.

 We certainly don't expect members to do anything like that, so why should we
 expect it of non-members?

Let's separate Incubator policy from my advice to Karl and other potential
IPMC aspirants.

Regarding Incubator policy, it may be useful to do something as liberal as
placing PPMC members on the IPMC as soon as we think they can be trusted with
a binding vote for their own podling releases.  That will also give them a
binding vote on other IPMC issues, but will it cause problems?  I dunno.


 Trust me.  Long experience with this issue tells me it won't cause any 
 problems.
 People generally stay out of situations they are not familiar with, and adults
 typically recuse themselves from voting on things where there's an obvious
 conflict of interest going on.


We've talked about shrinking the IPMC to a core of people who really know and
care about the Incubator, and this goes the opposite direction -- but it does
solve some difficult problems without compromising the ASF's legal chain of
authority over releases.


 The best kind of oversight is COMPETENT oversight.  People who understand
 the policy, intend to respect it, and are actually familiar with the podling's
 software are in the best position to cast binding votes over it.


For individuals who want to be on the IPMC, you will probably get noticed
faster if you contribute to the Incubator as an instititution -- and even
better, you will gain valuable experience regarding community, legal policies
and how the ASF works which will help your podling succeed over the long haul.
So I think it is in the interest of potential candidates to get involved, even
if the IPMC states that it's not a requirement.


 Again, very nice, but not at all necessary.  Random people running around 
 sticking
 their fingers in various holes in our oversight woes isn't conducive to sound 
 process.
 We aim for competent oversight over our podlings, and if there aren't enough
 mentors available to provide that, let's start sourcing the podling's 
 committers.

 Preferably starting with RM's who have already successfully managed to release
 once.

 It's not exactly rocket science.

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Thanks, Jukka.

Waiting for the last IPMC vote has become the longest and most
uncertain part of the ManifoldCF release process.  Considering the
amount of effort and good work that the committers put into each
release, it's surely not too much to ask for someone here to have a
look at it?  (We apologize; we really hate to bother you all, but
those ARE the rules...)

Respectfully,
Karl

On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 With Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We need one more...

 Anyone mind helping with the release?

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Sounds intriguing.  How is this done?  I'm afraid I'm vague as to the
process by which people become IPMC members.

Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
 The solution is simple, bring more IPMC members
 in from the ManifoldCF podling.  That is exactly
 what we did for Lucy!





 From: Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 02:11:49PM -0500, Karl Wright wrote:
 Waiting for the last IPMC vote has become the longest and most
 uncertain part of the ManifoldCF release process.  Considering the
 amount of effort and good work that the committers put into each
 release, it's surely not too much to ask for someone here to have a
 look at it?  (We apologize; we really hate to bother you all, but
 those ARE the rules...)

(Apologies in advance that this isn't a VOTE email...)

For what it's worth, I tried to review a release candidate for an earlier
ManifoldCF release, but I had to give up because I just didn't feel qualified
to evaluate the legal aspect given ManifoldCF's large number of dependencies
and my limited Java-fu.

I find it very challenging to step in as a freelance IPMC member to cast a
release vote on a project I haven't been involved with.

I definitely consider the difficulty in scraping up these votes to be a
significant weakness in how the Incubator operates right now, but I don't have
any ideas about how to improve the situation. :(

Marvin Humphrey


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





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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Thanks for at least having a look at this!

Even if you find the main release to be too big to look at, the three
ManifoldCF plugins, which have separate release packages (and vote
threads) are quite small with extremely limited dependencies.  Maybe
those would be easier to digest? ;-)

Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
 On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 02:11:49PM -0500, Karl Wright wrote:
 Waiting for the last IPMC vote has become the longest and most
 uncertain part of the ManifoldCF release process.  Considering the
 amount of effort and good work that the committers put into each
 release, it's surely not too much to ask for someone here to have a
 look at it?  (We apologize; we really hate to bother you all, but
 those ARE the rules...)

 (Apologies in advance that this isn't a VOTE email...)

 For what it's worth, I tried to review a release candidate for an earlier
 ManifoldCF release, but I had to give up because I just didn't feel qualified
 to evaluate the legal aspect given ManifoldCF's large number of dependencies
 and my limited Java-fu.

 I find it very challenging to step in as a freelance IPMC member to cast a
 release vote on a project I haven't been involved with.

 I definitely consider the difficulty in scraping up these votes to be a
 significant weakness in how the Incubator operates right now, but I don't have
 any ideas about how to improve the situation. :(

 Marvin Humphrey


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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

I was the RM for each release.
Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
 Let's make this simple for me: I see
 that the project has already successfully
 released 3 times now.  Who has been the

 RM for each release?





 From: Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 3:02 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

Generally good mentors recognize candidates
from their podlings who would make good IPMC
members and nominate them privately, just as
podlings nominate members for their own PPMC.





 From: Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org; Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

Sounds intriguing.  How is this done?  I'm afraid I'm vague as to the
process by which people become IPMC members.

Karl

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
 The solution is simple, bring more IPMC members
 in from the ManifoldCF podling.  That is exactly
 what we did for Lucy!





 From: Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 02:11:49PM -0500, Karl Wright wrote:
 Waiting for the last IPMC vote has become the longest and most
 uncertain part of the ManifoldCF release process.  Considering the
 amount of effort and good work that the committers put into each
 release, it's surely not too much to ask for someone here to have a
 look at it?  (We apologize; we really hate to bother you all, but
 those ARE the rules...)

(Apologies in advance that this isn't a VOTE email...)

For what it's worth, I tried to review a release candidate for an earlier
ManifoldCF release, but I had to give up because I just didn't feel 
qualified
to evaluate the legal aspect given ManifoldCF's large number of 
dependencies
and my limited Java-fu.

I find it very challenging to step in as a freelance IPMC member to cast a
release vote on a project I haven't been involved with.

I definitely consider the difficulty in scraping up these votes to be a
significant weakness in how the Incubator operates right now, but I don't 
have
any ideas about how to improve the situation. :(

Marvin Humphrey


-
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

Fwd: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

I think Jukka meant to post this to general@i.a.o...
Karl


-- Forwarded message --
From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
Date: Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 7:46 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2
To: Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com


Hi,

+1

BR,

Jukka Zitting

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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

With Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We need one more...

Karl

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Tommaso Teofili
tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2012/1/4 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Hello Incubator IPMC,

 Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.4-incubating,
 RC2.  This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
 You can find the artifact at
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright/apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, or
 in svn at
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.4-incubating-RC2
 .
  Thanks in advance!

 Karl


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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

With Tommaso's and Jukka's vote, that's 2 down.  We still need one
more binding IPMC vote for this subpackage.

Karl

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

 On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hello incubator,
 
  We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
  system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
  the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
  We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
 
  Karl
 
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
  Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
  0.1-incubating
  To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
 
 
  Hi,
 
  +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
 
  I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
  package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.
 
  Some comments, none blocking:
 
  * The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
  for the release.
  * The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
  troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
  svn tree.
  * Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
  of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
  ManifoldCF dependencies.
 
  [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html
 
  BR,
 
  Jukka Zitting

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



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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

We need one more binding IPMC vote for this sub-package.  Any takers?
Karl

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

 On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hello incubator,
 
  We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
  system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
  the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
  We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).
 
  Karl
 
 
  -- Forwarded message --
  From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
  Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
  Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
  0.1-incubating
  To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org
 
 
  Hi,
  +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
  I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
  package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
  See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.
 
  BR,
  Jukka Zitting

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



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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

One more binding vote needed for this subpackage.  Please somebody vote!

Karl

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Tommaso Teofili
tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

 Tommaso

 2011/12/29 Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com

 Hello incubator,

 We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
 system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
 the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
 We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

 Karl


 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
 Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
 Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
 apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
 To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


 Hi,

 +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

 I checked the
 apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
 package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
 Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
 package, just statically review it.

 One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
 is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
 crypto code, we should remove the Cryptographic Software Notice
 entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
 in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

 -
 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-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Hello Incubator IPMC,

Please vote on whether or not to release ManifoldCF 0.4-incubating,
RC2.  This RC has passed our podling vote and awaits your inspection.
You can find the artifact at
http://people.apache.org/~kwright/apache-manifoldcf-0.4-incubating, or
in svn at 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.4-incubating-RC2.
 Thanks in advance!

Karl

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

Re: Q. Forks without concensus?; A. anytime / depends / never without agreement

[Karl Wright]

Any time a body of code is contributed from another source, it should
go through the standard Apache procedures, including a license grant
(if it's not open-source already).  But this is very different from
spinning off chunks of an existing incubator project.

For example, ManifoldCF is currently attempting to spin off three
subprojects.  Each of the subprojects is more tightly related in some
way to other projects than it is to ManifoldCF itself, and in an ideal
world these other projects would incorporate the subproject code
themselves.  Unfortunately, in two of the cases (plugins for two
versions of Lucene/Solr) the project has refused to include the code,
and in another case (a SharePoint plugin) the main project is not
open-sourced in the first place.

I would hope that there would be enough flexibility in the incubator
model to permit this kind of thing.  Just my two cents, nonbinding...

Karl

On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Donald Whytock dwhyt...@gmail.com wrote:
 It occurs to me that the ASF, in enforcing open-source licensing,
 becomes a source of free legal advice to the open-source community,
 whether it intends to or not...

 1. Contribute a body of code to ASF.

 2. Is it legal for us to accept this?  Better run it past legal@.

 3. Use acceptance of the contribution as certification that it can be
 used by the contributor.

 Just sayin'.  Not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing.

 Don

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello incubator,

 We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
 system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
 the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
 We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

 Karl


 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
 Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
 Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
 0.1-incubating
 To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


 Hi,
 +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
 I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
 package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
 See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.

 BR,
 Jukka Zitting

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

[VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Hello incubator,

We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

Karl


-- Forwarded message --
From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


Hi,

+1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

I checked the apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
package, just statically review it.

One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
crypto code, we should remove the Cryptographic Software Notice
entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello incubator,

 We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
 system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
 the first one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
 We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

 Karl


 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
 Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 1:15 PM
 Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release
 apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin 0.1-incubating
 To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


 Hi,

 +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

 I checked the 
 apache-manifoldcf-sharepoint-3.0-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
 package with SHA1 checksum 4400b19cf0940bae30778e9fdcb992122ecbc142.
 Without Windows or SharePoint readily at hand I couldn't build the
 package, just statically review it.

 One comment (not blocking) that applies also to the other components
 is that since these components (AFAIUI) don't contain or use any
 crypto code, we should remove the Cryptographic Software Notice
 entries from the README files. Those notices should only be included
 in components referenced in http://www.apache.org/licenses/exports/.

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

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

[VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Hello incubator,

We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
the second one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

Karl


-- Forwarded message --
From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin
0.1-incubating
To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


Hi,
+1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)
I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-4.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
package with SHA1 checksum 84065fe25707beec3b25831a9df56579ad685a50.
See my comments for the Solr 3.x plugin.

BR,
Jukka Zitting

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

[VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Hello incubator,

We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

Karl


-- Forwarded message --
From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
0.1-incubating
To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


Hi,

+1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.

Some comments, none blocking:

* The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
for the release.
* The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
svn tree.
* Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
ManifoldCF dependencies.

[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html

BR,

Jukka Zitting

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

Re: [VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin 0.1-incubating

[Karl Wright]

Sorry - you can find the proposed release package at:
http://people.apache.org/~kwright.

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hello incubator,

 We've decided to release some of the ManifoldCF server or target
 system plugins with their own versioning and release schedule.  Here's
 the third one.  Please vote +1 if you agree it should be released.
 We've got one vote already (from Jukka, one of our mentors).

 Karl


 -- Forwarded message --
 From: Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com
 Date: Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 12:35 PM
 Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Release apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin
 0.1-incubating
 To: connectors-...@incubator.apache.org


 Hi,

 +1 from me too (binding also for the upcoming IPMC vote)

 I checked the apache-manifoldcf-solr-3.x-plugin-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
 package with SHA1 checksum 14adbae8c05dc589a707208a172901cddd5c19d5.

 Some comments, none blocking:

 * The release signing guide [1] recommends to have also SHA1 checksums
 for the release.
 * The approach to do an svn checkout as a part of the build is a bit
 troublesome. The build will fail as soon as Lucene rearranges their
 svn tree.
 * Would it make sense to contribute this code directly to Solr instead
 of having it in ManifoldCF? Especially since the code has no direct
 ManifoldCF dependencies.

 [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

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

Re: Incubator PMC/Board report for Dec 2011 ([ppmc])

[Karl Wright]

To our mentors,

The September 2011 report was not signed off.  Could one of you review
the current December report and sign off on it?  Thanks!

Karl

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Marvin no-re...@apache.org wrote:


 Dear podling,

 This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator 
 PMC.
 It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly
 board report.

 The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 21 December 2011, 10:00:00 PST. The 
 report
 for your podling will form a part of the Incubator PMC report. The Incubator 
 PMC
 requires your report to be submitted 2 weeks before the board meeting, to 
 allow
 sufficient time for review and submission (Wed, Dec 7th).

 Please submit your report with sufficient time to allow the incubator PMC, and
 subsequently board members to review and digest. Again, the very latest you
 should submit your report is 2 weeks prior to the board meeting.

 Thanks,

 The Apache Incubator PMC

 Submitting your Report
 --

 Your report should contain the following:

  * Your project name
  * A brief description of your project, which assumes no knowledge of the 
 project
   or necessarily of its field
  * A list of the three most important issues to address in the move towards
   graduation.
  * Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be aware 
 of
  * How has the community developed since the last report
  * How has the project developed since the last report.

 This should be appended to the Incubator Wiki page at:

  http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/2011

 Note: This manually populated. You may need to wait a little before this page 
 is
      created from a template.

 Mentors
 ---
 Mentors should review reports for their project(s) and sign them off on the
 Incubator wiki page. Signing off reports shows that you are following the
 project - projects that are not signed may raise alarms for the Incubator PMC.

 Incubator PMC


 -
 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: Latest copyright sign-off status [Was: Podlings needing copyright sign-off]

[Karl Wright]

The only software ever granted to ASF by MetaCarta was the code for
ManifoldCF.  It was not called ManifoldCF at that time, and was not
imported into svn with any manifoldcf strings anywhere.  But look
for package names that include com.metacarta.agents,
com.metacarta.crawler, com.metacarta.core, etc.  If you find those
you can be assured it is the right grant.

Karl

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Craig L Russell
craig.russ...@oracle.com wrote:
 I can verify that this software grant from Metacarta was dated 1st day of
 February, 2010.

 From the list of files, I cannot say exactly what the grant covers.
 ManifoldCF doesn't jump out of the list of files. There appear to be over a
 thousand files covered by the grant. The only package name that jumps is
 metacarta, with sub-packages including core, agents, crawler,

 Hope this helps a bit.

 Craig

 On Nov 13, 2011, at 9:06 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote:

 2011/11/11 Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com

 Updating this, half of the items without sign-off in July are now
 signed off. I've updated the list below (though I've not yet added new
 PMCs since June).

 Here's the previous email:

 On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote:

 Here's a list of the projects in the Incubator who need to sign off
 their copyright item; namely:

 Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
 been received.
 It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core
 code, and any
 new code produced by the project.  

 Here's the latest list:

 2008-09-29  olio
 2009-02-09  kato
 2009-02-13  stonehenge
 2009-05-08  ace
 2009-05-13  socialsite
 2009-06-25  wink
 2009-11-08  hise
 2010-01-27  manifoldcf


 in the recorded grants file I can see:

 Software grant from Metacarta, Inc.
  ...

 and, as far as I know, this is the required paperwork for ManifoldCF
 (previously knwon as Lucene Connectors Framework).

 Please let me know if I'm missing something.

 Tommaso



 2010-05-19  amber
 2010-05-24  zetacomponents
 2010-09-05  nuvem
 2010-11-02  celix
 2010-11-12  kitty
 2010-11-24  stanbol
 2010-12-02  jena
 2010-12-02  opennlp
 2011-06-13  openofficeorg

 Hen

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



 Craig L Russell
 Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
 c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo











 -
 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: Projects failing to repoirt for October - appropriate actions?

[Karl Wright]

ManifoldCF submitted a report in September.  I'm not sure why this was
not logged.

Karl

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Noel J. Bergman n...@devtech.com wrote:
 On most months, I have to chase down missing reports.

 ETCH, HAMA, HCATALOG (managed to do a release, though), KATO, MANIFOLDCF
 (also managed to do a release, though), RAT and WAVE all failed to report
 this month.

 RAT was discussing graduation, but still needs to report.  Two others were
 active enough to put out releases, but failed to report.  Wave has been
 active enough to discuss their next steps, but failed to report.

 What should be done with these projects?  Which one(s) should be retired?

        --- Noel



 -
 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: October 2011 Incubator Board Report

[Karl Wright]

ManifoldCF is also listed as March, June, September, and December on
the referenced page.

Karl

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Michael Fitzner
fitzner.mich...@googlemail.com wrote:
 I think some projects are wrong scheduled for the „October 2011
 Incubator Board Report“ The current schedule plan
 http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ReportingSchedule shows that projects
 like Etch, Hama, Hcatalog are in the months March, June, September,
 December and not in October. It would be greate if someone could
 correct this in the October report.

 The Etch project had its report in September; see
 http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2011 and
 http://incubator.apache.org/clutch.html

 If there was a decision to report in October too, we would like to
 apologise for missing it.

 Thanks
 Michael F. (Apache Etch)

 2011/10/18 Noel J. Bergman n...@devtech.com:
 Most of the general discussion on the Incubator list over the past month was
 how to improve the usability of the Incubator web-site.

 S4 (Simple Scalable Streaming System) -- a general-purpose, distributed,
 scalable, partially fault-tolerant, pluggable platform that allows
 programmers to easily develop applications for processing continuous,
 unbounded streams of data -- was voted to begin Incubation.

 Any23 (Anything To Triples) -- a Java library, a Web service and a set of
 command line tools to extract and validate structured data in RDF format
 from a variety of Web documents and markup formats -- was voted to begin
 Incubation.

 Apache DirectMemory -- a multi-layered cache implementation featuring
 off-heap memory storage (ala Terracotta BigMemory) to enable caching of Java
 objects without degrading JVM performance -- was voted to begin Incubation.

 Apache Callback (derived from PhonaGap) -- a platform for building native
 (Apple iOS, Google Android, RIM BlackBerry, Microsoft Windows Phone 7, HP
 webOS, Nokia Symbian and Samsung Bada) mobile applications using HTML, CSS
 and JavaScript -- was voted to begin Incubation.

 DeltaCloud is currently voting on graduation from the Incubator.  ACE is
 also discussing graduation.

 ETCH, HAMA, HCATALOG (managed to do a release, though), KATO, MANIFOLDCF
 (also managed to do a release, though), RAT and WAVE all failed to report
 this month.  The Chair is raising the issue of what to do with these
 projects.

 --

 Accumulo

 Accumulo is a sorted, distributed key/value store based on BigTable's
 design.  Accumulo entered incubation in September 2011.

 In the move towards graduation, we must address:
 1. Learning Apache procedures
 2. Creating releases
 3. Building a community

 Any issues that the Incubator PMC or ASF Board might wish/need to be aware
 of:
 Discussion is ongoing as to whether agreements other than ICLAs are needed
 or desirable for people employed by the US government to make contributions
 to Apache (see LEGAL-100).

 Developments since entering incubation:
 * mailing lists created
 * JIRA created
 * SVN directory and git mirror created
 * accounts for initial committers created
 * ICLAs and Software Grant filed
 * CMS-ready site begun
 * initial code uploaded
 * Jenkins build created
 * ReviewBoard group created


 ---

 ACE

 Apache ACE is a software distribution framework that allows you to centrally
 manage and distribute software components, configuration data and other
 artifacts to target systems. ACE started incubation on April 24th 2009.

 There are currently no issues requiring board or Incubator PMC attention.

 Community:
  * We've got a lot of great feedback and patches from the community.
  * There have been talks with the jclouds (we use them) as well as the
 Amdatu (they use us) open source projects.

 Software:
  * We now have a REST client API.
  * The management agent has been extended.
  * Karaf features were added.
  * We have a server side resolver based on Apache Felix.

 Licensing and other issues:
  * None at the moment.

 Things to resolve prior to graduation:
  * We hope this is our very last board report as we think we're ready for
 graduation now!


 

 Ambari

 Ambari is monitoring, administration and lifecycle management project for
 Apache Hadoop clusters.

  * Incubating since 30 August 2011.
  * Mailing lists created and mentors subscribed.
  * Confluence created.
  * Initial code committed.
  * Site created.
  * Code grant received.
  * Development proceeding actively.
  * RAT added to pom and report is clean.


 

 Any23

 Anything To Triples (shortly Any23) defined as a Java library, a Web service
 and a set of command line tools to extract and validate structured data in
 RDF format from a variety of Web documents and markup formats. Any23 is what
 it is informally named an RDF Distiller.

 A list of the three most important issues to address in the move towards
 graduation

   1. Port Any23 code to ASF infrastructure and update license 

Mailing list membership counts

[Karl Wright]

Hi folks,

I'm trying to get a membership count for the ManifoldCF member lists.
I'm a moderator for these, and at one point I was able to figure out
how to do it, but the reference that the committers page sends you
to (the svn committers project, under /doc/resources.txt) doesn't
seem to exist anymore.  Furthermore, sending mail to
connectors-dev-l...@incubator.apache.org claims I'm not a moderator,
even though I clearly am, and I'm certain I'm using the right source
email account.  Is there a reference I can look at, or has something
changed?

Thanks
Karl

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

[RESULT][VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating?

[Karl Wright]

Three binding +1's, 72 hours.  Vote passes!

A big thanks to all that voted too... ;-)

Karl

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

[ANNOUNCE] Announcing general availability of Apache ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating!

[Karl Wright]

Thanks to all who put time and effort into this release!

The site and download mirrors should update in a day or so, but if you
cannot wait, you can download the release in the interim from
http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/manifoldcf.

Karl

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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating?

[Karl Wright]

If I count correctly, we still need one more binding +1.  ManifoldCF
only has two mentors, so this vote will have to come from incubator
community at large.  But we'd also love to have a third mentor!

Karl

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi,

 On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 The ManifoldCF community has voted to release ManifoldCF
 0.3-incubating RC1.  Now it is your turn to vote!  You can pick up the
 artifact at http://people.apache.org/~kwright, or if you want to look
 at the svn tag it's at
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.3-incubating-RC1.

 +1 looks good

 BR,

 Jukka Zitting

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



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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating?

[Karl Wright]

+1 from me, of course, also (non-binding)

Karl

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Tommaso Teofili
tommaso.teof...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1 (binding)
 Tommaso



 Il giorno 13/set/2011, alle ore 19:33, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com ha 
 scritto:

 The ManifoldCF community has voted to release ManifoldCF
 0.3-incubating RC1.  Now it is your turn to vote!  You can pick up the
 artifact at http://people.apache.org/~kwright, or if you want to look
 at the svn tag it's at
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.3-incubating-RC1.

 Thanks!
 Karl

 -
 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 ManifoldCF 0.3-incubating?

[Karl Wright]

The ManifoldCF community has voted to release ManifoldCF
0.3-incubating RC1.  Now it is your turn to vote!  You can pick up the
artifact at http://people.apache.org/~kwright, or if you want to look
at the svn tag it's at
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.3-incubating-RC1.

Thanks!
Karl

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

Anybody know legality of saaj-impl-1.3.jar?

[Karl Wright]

Hi all,

The ManifoldCF has had a connector contributed that is based on Apache
Chemistry.  The dependencies of Apache Chemistry include
activation-1.1.jar and saaj-impl-1.3.jar, both of which seem to be
from Sun, and are (I believe) covered by the Sun/Oracle license.  I
was told a while back that activation.jar could not be included in MCF
for this reason, but that there was a geronimo-activation.jar
available instead, which is what ManifoldCF uses.  But I don't know
about saaj-impl.

(a) Does anyone know if there's an Apache-licensed replacement for saaj-impl?
(b) Should somebody tell Chemistry that they may have a license problem?

Thanks!
Karl

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

Re: Anybody know legality of saaj-impl-1.3.jar?

[Karl Wright]

Yes, of course, I asked the contributor to post on your list. ;-)  But
it looks like that's not necessary now.

Karl

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Florent Guillaume f...@nuxeo.com wrote:
 Yes, you should Cc the chemistry list to tell us about it :)
 Maybe legal@ also?

 Florent

 On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi all,

 The ManifoldCF has had a connector contributed that is based on Apache
 Chemistry.  The dependencies of Apache Chemistry include
 activation-1.1.jar and saaj-impl-1.3.jar, both of which seem to be
 from Sun, and are (I believe) covered by the Sun/Oracle license.  I
 was told a while back that activation.jar could not be included in MCF
 for this reason, but that there was a geronimo-activation.jar
 available instead, which is what ManifoldCF uses.  But I don't know
 about saaj-impl.

 (a) Does anyone know if there's an Apache-licensed replacement for saaj-impl?
 (b) Should somebody tell Chemistry that they may have a license problem?

 Thanks!
 Karl

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





 --
 Florent Guillaume, Director of RD, Nuxeo
 Open Source, Java EE based, Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
 http://www.nuxeo.com   http://www.nuxeo.org   +33 1 40 33 79 87

 -
 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: Anybody know legality of saaj-impl-1.3.jar?

[Karl Wright]

OK - so now I'm getting conflicting advice.  Somebody went through a
fair bit of effort to implement the geronimo versions of all these
packages, including saaj-impl.  Are you saying that Sun/Oracle
recently changed the licensing terms sufficiently that substituting
the geronimo jars is no longer necessary?  If so, what caveats do I
need to include in NOTICE.txt and LICENSE.txt, or should I just copy
whatever Chemistry does?

Karl

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org wrote:
 On Thursday, July 07, 2011 9:08:52 AM Karl Wright wrote:
 Hi all,

 The ManifoldCF has had a connector contributed that is based on Apache
 Chemistry.  The dependencies of Apache Chemistry include
 activation-1.1.jar and saaj-impl-1.3.jar, both of which seem to be
 from Sun, and are (I believe) covered by the Sun/Oracle license.  I
 was told a while back that activation.jar could not be included in MCF
 for this reason, but that there was a geronimo-activation.jar
 available instead, which is what ManifoldCF uses.  But I don't know
 about saaj-impl.

 The recent versions of most of that stuff is CDDL which is OK (category b
 license) for shipping the binaries.     Definitely use 1.3.2 though:

 http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/com/sun/xml/messaging/saaj/saaj-impl/1.3.2/



 Dan




 (a) Does anyone know if there's an Apache-licensed replacement for
 saaj-impl? (b) Should somebody tell Chemistry that they may have a license
 problem?

 Thanks!
 Karl

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
 --
 Daniel Kulp
 dk...@apache.org
 http://dankulp.com/blog
 Talend - http://www.talend.com


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

Re: Anybody know legality of saaj-impl-1.3.jar?

[Karl Wright]

Thanks - that's sufficient as far as I am concerned. ;-)
Karl

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Ioannis Canellos ioca...@gmail.com wrote:
 There is no conflict. I just told you that Geronimo provides its own specs,
 which are definitely safe to use. I don't know how safe it is to use the
 original ones, but I would trust Dan.

 --
 *Ioannis Canellos*
 *
  http://iocanel.blogspot.com

 Apache Karaf http://karaf.apache.org/ Committer  PMC
 Apache ServiceMix http://servicemix.apache.org/  Committer
 *


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

ManifoldCF: Another mentor needed?

[Karl Wright]

Hi,

The ManifoldCF project just lost Grant Ingersoll as a mentor, who
resigned last Tuesday.  ManifoldCF has been incubating since January
2010 and basically provides a framework and connectors for
synchronizing content from a set of repositories to a set of target
search engines, with security.  Although Tommaso Teofili joined
recently, we could really use the full complement of three mentors, so
I was wondering if there are any additional interested parties wanting
to function in this capacity for ManifoldCF.

Please let us know!
Karl

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

[RESULT][VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Vote: Three +1's, no -1's.

Vote passes.
Karl

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Vote has passed the PPMC for this release candidate.

 The RC2 of the ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating release is now up on
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright.  The svn tag is at
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.2-incubating-RC2.

 Please vote!

 Thanks,
 Karl


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

[ANNOUNCE] ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating released!

[Karl Wright]

Thanks to all that voted!
Karl

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

Re: ManifoldCF mentors (was Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2)

[Karl Wright]

Oh - and in case any potential mentors lurking out there would like to
know what ManifoldCF really does, and where it fits in in the broader
picture, you can look at the first chapter of ManifoldCF in Action for
free here: http://www.manning.com/wright/ .  This describes the
problem space pretty well, I think.

Long-term future plans involve extending ManifoldCF so it can scale in
a distributed fashion, which will require initial work to use
Zookeeper as the cross-process synchronization mechanism, as well as
building a distributed queue across multiple database instances.
Also, ManifoldCF has rather unique requirements as far as testing
infrastructure is concerned, which could arguably lead to other
spinoff Apache projects someday.

Please contact me if you're interested!

Karl


On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 8:07 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Thanks for the information.  I can offer one pot of gold (at end of
 rainbow, of course), but that's all I've got. ;-)
 Seriously, if anyone is interested in mentoring ManifoldCF, please let
 me know.  If I have a name or two I'll throw it open for discussion on
 the connectors-private list.

 Thanks!
 Karl



 On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote:


 On Mon, 09 May 2011 05:19 -0400, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 We effectively have only one active mentor.  There were others, of
 course, when the project entered incubation, but they have not stepped
 up to date in any capacity.  And Grant, as you probably know, has
 bazillions of other responsibilities.  It may be worth trying to find
 new mentors to join ManifoldCF, since this is probably limiting our
 chances of graduation at this point.  Does this ever happen (that
 anyone is aware of)?

 The process for finding new mentors is much the same as it was when
 entering the incubator. Ask for volunteers, ask possible candidates,
 offer large sums of money (oh, no, we're not supposed to do that...).

 Assuming a possible mentor is a member of the Incubator PMC, then their
 becoming a mentor for your project is as simple as informing the
 Incubator PMC and updating the status page.

 Upayavira

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




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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Hi - just to clarify, we did not include the HTTPD extension in the
release, but it remains available in source control for backwards
compatibility.  Most people use the Active Directory Authority at the
moment.  But thank you for compiling it.

As for the RAT report, the skins question is known and a ticket is
open for that.  The other files are temporary files resulting from
your test run and I will open a ticket to exclude those from the
rat-source target.

We've still received zero binding evaluations from incubator for this
release, FWIW.

Karl



On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
 On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 12:57:03PM -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
 Just to be clear, the ManifoldCF podling needs incubator consideration
 of the release candidate in order to do the release, and three binding
 +1 votes.  Any chance that this might happen?

 Since I'm only a podling committer and not an Incubator PMC member, I can't
 offer a binding vote.  Nevertheless, I've performed some superficial QC on the
 release candidate.

  * All signatures and sums check out, including for the binary artifacts.
  * ant test succeeds on the expanded src.tar.gz tarball on my OS X laptop.
  * The HTTPD extension builds after a Makefile hack (explained below).
  * ant clean properly cleans up after ant test.
  * There's a problem with line endings in the src.tar.gz archive.

 The HTTPD module, mod_authz_annotate, built successfully, but only after I
 hacked the Makefile to use apxs instead of apxs2.  Not a blocker, IMO, but
 now you know. :)  Also, neither make clean nor ant clean cleans up all
 build detritus -- these got left behind:

    mod_authz_annotate.la
    mod_authz_annotate.lo
    mod_authz_annotate.o
    mod_authz_annotate.slo

 I was surprised to find that most of the text files in the src.tar.gz have
 Windows line endings.  That's ugly, but not a blocker IMO.  It looks like they
 have the proper settings in Subversion -- e.g. for README.txt, svn:eol-style
 is native -- so it seems the problem arose because the tar.gz package was
 prepared on a Windows box.  Maybe try preparing the tar.gz on something
 unixish in the future.

 Lastly, I ran ant rat-sources, and though it declared BUILD SUCCESSFUL,
 RAT flagged 8 files:

    connectors/filesystem/test-output-postgresql/logging.ini
    connectors/filesystem/test-output-postgresql/manifoldcf.log
    connectors/filesystem/test-output-postgresql/properties.xml
    framework/test-output-postgresql/logging.ini
    framework/test-output-postgresql/manifoldcf.log
    framework/test-output-postgresql/properties.xml
    site/src/documentation/skins/common/xslt/html/split.xsl
    site/src/documentation/skins/lucene/note.txt

 I'd suggest presenting a clean RAT report next time you call a vote on an RC 
 to
 make things easier on everybody.

 Hope this helps,

 Marvin Humphrey


 -
 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: Erlend Garåsen, voted to be a committer for ManifoldCF, still waiting for an Apache account

[Karl Wright]

One of our mentors, Grant Ingersoll, officially requested an account
for Erlend about two weeks ago.  There has still been no activity.  Is
there any other process step we might have missed?

Karl

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Gavin McDonald ga...@16degrees.com.au wrote:


 -Original Message-
 From: Karl Wright [mailto:daddy...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Wednesday, 27 April 2011 7:04 AM
 To: general@incubator.apache.org; Erlend Garåsen
 Subject: Erlend Garåsen, voted to be a committer for ManifoldCF, still
 waiting
 for an Apache account

 Hi folks,

 About 3 weeks ago I cc'd the results of the ManifoldCF PPMC vote on Erlend
 to priv...@incubator.apache.org, as per the instructions, but he still has
 not
 received any communication about an Apache account and is thus blocked
 from doing committer related activities.  Is there some process that we
 missed?

 Yes, the Mentors for ManifoldCF should be asking root@ for the acct, to date
 that
 has not happened. No request means no acct.

 Gav...


 Thanks,
 Karl

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



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



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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

We effectively have only one active mentor.  There were others, of
course, when the project entered incubation, but they have not stepped
up to date in any capacity.  And Grant, as you probably know, has
bazillions of other responsibilities.  It may be worth trying to find
new mentors to join ManifoldCF, since this is probably limiting our
chances of graduation at this point.  Does this ever happen (that
anyone is aware of)?

Karl

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 4:44 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:

 We've still received zero binding evaluations from incubator for this
 release, FWIW.


 I think a problem might be that its so big so a little daunting to
 review, I did start having a look but haven't enough time yet, I'll
 try to find some time in the next few days. You should pester your
 mentors to vote as thats one of their duties they accepted when
 signing up to be a mentor.

   ...ant

 -
 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: ManifoldCF mentors (was Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2)

[Karl Wright]

Thanks for the information.  I can offer one pot of gold (at end of
rainbow, of course), but that's all I've got. ;-)
Seriously, if anyone is interested in mentoring ManifoldCF, please let
me know.  If I have a name or two I'll throw it open for discussion on
the connectors-private list.

Thanks!
Karl



On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Upayavira u...@odoko.co.uk wrote:


 On Mon, 09 May 2011 05:19 -0400, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 We effectively have only one active mentor.  There were others, of
 course, when the project entered incubation, but they have not stepped
 up to date in any capacity.  And Grant, as you probably know, has
 bazillions of other responsibilities.  It may be worth trying to find
 new mentors to join ManifoldCF, since this is probably limiting our
 chances of graduation at this point.  Does this ever happen (that
 anyone is aware of)?

 The process for finding new mentors is much the same as it was when
 entering the incubator. Ask for volunteers, ask possible candidates,
 offer large sums of money (oh, no, we're not supposed to do that...).

 Assuming a possible mentor is a member of the Incubator PMC, then their
 becoming a mentor for your project is as simple as informing the
 Incubator PMC and updating the status page.

 Upayavira

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



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

Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Hi again,

Just to be clear, the ManifoldCF podling needs incubator consideration
of the release candidate in order to do the release, and three binding
+1 votes.  Any chance that this might happen?

Karl

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Vote has passed the PPMC for this release candidate.

 The RC2 of the ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating release is now up on
 http://people.apache.org/~kwright.  The svn tag is at
 https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.2-incubating-RC2.

 Please vote!

 Thanks,
 Karl


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

[VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating, RC2

[Karl Wright]

Vote has passed the PPMC for this release candidate.

The RC2 of the ManifoldCF 0.2-incubating release is now up on
http://people.apache.org/~kwright.  The svn tag is at
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.2-incubating-RC2.

Please vote!

Thanks,
Karl

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

Erlend Garåsen, voted to be a committer for ManifoldCF, still waiting for an Apache account

[Karl Wright]

Hi folks,

About 3 weeks ago I cc'd the results of the ManifoldCF PPMC vote on
Erlend to priv...@incubator.apache.org, as per the instructions, but
he still has not received any communication about an Apache account
and is thus blocked from doing committer related activities.  Is there
some process that we missed?

Thanks,
Karl

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

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 incubating, RC8

[Karl Wright]

There were three binding +1's, and nothing else.  Release passes!
Karl

On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 It looks like we're going to go ahead and release.
 I'll post a [RESULT][VOTE] message when that is certain.
 Karl

 On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 About  5 hours after ant voted, a user discovered that a problem we'd
 thought was fixed in RC8 is still in fact present, albeit in a
 slightly different form.  The community is trying to figure out if
 this should mean a new RC or not.  We did triage the problem initially
 as a release blocker.

 The main downside of a new RC is getting a quorum to evaluate and vote
 on it in the incubator.  This part of the process took two weeks for
 RC8.  The issue is CONNECTORS-148.  Any advice is welcome.  I believe
 that the incubator vote is technically still open.

 Thanks,
 Karl

 On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 4:20 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote:
 +1

   ...ant

 On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote:
 Thanks for the votes!  Still need one more binding +1...
 Karl

 On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
 chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
 Hi Karl,

 +1 from me (binding).

 Signatures check out:

 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --import 
 *.KEYS
 gpg: key 03824582: Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
 kwri...@apache.org not changed
 gpg: key FE045966: Grant Ingersoll (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
 gsing...@apache.org not changed
 gpg: Total number processed: 2
 gpg:              unchanged: 2

 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
 apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz.asc
 gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:16 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
 gpg: Good signature from Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
 kwri...@apache.org
 gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
 gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
 owner.
 Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
 4582

 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
 apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip.asc
 gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:19:07 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
 gpg: Good signature from Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
 kwri...@apache.org
 gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
 gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
 owner.
 Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
 4582

 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
 apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz.asc
 gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:59 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
 gpg: Good signature from Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
 kwri...@apache.org
 gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
 gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
 owner.
 Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
 4582

 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% gpg --verify 
 apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip.asc
 gpg: Signature made Tue Jan 11 14:18:41 2011 PST using RSA key ID 03824582
 gpg: Good signature from Karl David Wright (CODE SIGNING KEY) 
 kwri...@apache.org
 gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
 gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the 
 owner.
 Primary key fingerprint: E74B 06A0 454F 6E92 400A  3450 FD1F F09C 0382 
 4582
 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann%

 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% cat *.md5
 C7CA5B01ADC5A785F63ED559169B4390 
 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
 CF1744BF9ACF2EFD17F705A875691B02 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip
 D134D3F1D01060F2B6800FB19572A576 
 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
 BA2F388B9AF5E66FC0F1437C98EDF846 *apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip

 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann% md5sum 
 *-bin*.tar.gz *-bin*.zip *-src*.tar.gz *-src*.zip
 c7ca5b01adc5a785f63ed559169b4390  
 apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.tar.gz
 cf1744bf9acf2efd17f705a875691b02  apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-bin.zip
 d134d3f1d01060f2b6800fb19572a576  
 apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.tar.gz
 ba2f388b9af5e66fc0f1437c98edf846  apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating-src.zip
 [chipotle:~/tmp/apache-manifoldcf-0.1-incubating] mattmann%

 Thanks for including CHANGES.txt and KEYS. That really helped.

 Great job and great working the process!

 Cheers,
 Chris




 On Jan 24, 2011, at 9:54 PM, Karl Wright wrote:

 Oh, forgot to mention that the release candidate tag is at:

 http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lcf/tags/release-0.1-incubating-RC8/

 Karl

 On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:48 PM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com