Need help resolving cron issue
I'm sorry to send this to the entire list, but I'm not sure whom to contact. I am continually receiving emails like the one below. I don't even have an apache.org account any more. How can I get this cron job deleted? OLIO is not an active project. Thanks much Shanti -- Forwarded message -- From: Cron Daemon sha...@apache.org Date: Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 3:00 PM Subject: Cron shanti@minotaur (/usr/local/bin/rsync -p -r /www/confluence-exports/OLIO/ /www/incubator.apache.org/content/olio) To: sha...@apache.org rsync: mkdir /www/incubator.apache.org/content/olio failed: Permission denied (13) rsync error: error in file IO (code 11) at main.c(587) [Receiver=3.0.9] rsync: connection unexpectedly closed (9 bytes received so far) [sender] rsync error: error in rsync protocol data stream (code 12) at io.c(605) [sender=3.0.9]
Re: Podlings needing copyright sign-off
I had sent in the CCLA for Olio in 2008 October. For some reason it doesn't seem to have been registered by Apache. I have sent Craig Russell the hard copy of the original today. Shanti On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote: Etch and Tashi are signed off. Droids (seems the easiest one to sign off on) and Olio (likely to be retired) left from 2008 inductees. 2009 list remains unchanged from below. Hen On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote: Noting that vcl have signed off on the first copyright item. That leaves 2008 with: * etch * olio [sounds like this might be retired] * droids * tashi From 2009: * kato * stonehenge * ace * socialsite * wink * vxquery * hise * clerezza Hen On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Henri Yandell flame...@gmail.com wrote: Noting that the following have signed off on the below item now: * lucene.net * jspwiki * rat * empire-db With bluesky being retired, that closes out projects starting in 2007 and the first half of 2008. The remaining 2008 projects are: * 2008-09-23 etch * 2008-09-29 olio * 2008-10-01 vcl * 2008-10-23 droids * 2008-11-12 tashi [My view is that anyone whose been in the incubator longer than 6 months should have successfully resolved this item] Hen 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. The list is: 2007-10-06 jspwiki 2008-01-06 rat 2008-04-15 bluesky (pending retirement) 2008-08-01 empire-db 2008-09-23 etch 2008-09-29 olio 2008-10-01 vcl 2008-10-23 droids 2008-11-12 tashi 2009-02-09 kato 2009-02-13 stonehenge 2009-05-08 ace 2009-05-13 socialsite 2009-06-25 wink 2009-08-07 vxquery 2009-11-08 hise 2009-12-15 clerezza 2010-01-27 manifoldcf 2010-05-19 amber 2010-05-21 deltacloud 2010-05-24 zetacomponents 2010-07-19 chukwa 2010-09-05 nuvem 2010-09-27 alois 2010-11-02 celix 2010-11-12 kitty 2010-11-24 stanbol 2010-12-02 jena 2010-12-02 opennlp 2010-12-08 wave 2011-01-03 mesos 2011-02-01 easyant 2011-02-05 lucene.net 2011-04-30 ognl 2011-06-13 flume 2011-06-13 openofficeorg 2011-06-13 sqoop Some are new podlings, so no huge surprise, but others have been around for a long time. I think each podling needs to focus on getting this checklist item resolved. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Retire Olio?
Perhaps. But the project is still useful and I see researchers using it (the activity usually picks up during the summer months). If we can arrange for the project to be still easily available i.e. downloadable binary kits + svn access that would be ideal. Shanti On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Noel J. Bergman n...@devtech.com wrote: I see no development in 18 months. Is it time to terminate? --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: JSPWiki, Olio and VXQuery missing
Olio is there now. Shanti On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Noel J. Bergman n...@devtech.com wrote: Please submit ASAP. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Olio 0.2 Released
Olio 0.2 has bee released and can be downloaded from http://incubator.apache.org/olio/downloads.html After downloading, please see the Release Notes for information on issues fixed in this release. Shanti
Re: [VOTE] Release Olio 0.2
Thank you. The src release also includes the binaries so that a user does not have to do his own build. Shanti ant elder wrote: +1 The Java src archive seems to include some of the binary artifacts (eg webapp.war), the license/notice covers everything so its not an issue just pointing it out in case its not intentional. ...ant On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@gmail.com wrote: A reminder to please take a look at the Olio release and Vote. Thanks Shanti -- Forwarded message -- From: Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com Date: Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 5:39 PM Subject: [VOTE] Release Olio 0.2 To: general@incubator.apache.org The Olio community has voted to release Olio 0.2. We now request the Incubator PMC for a vote. The proposed release artifacts are located at http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.2. There are 3 versions (PHP, Rails and Java) in both binary and source formats. Each package is available in both tar and zip format and include asc and md5 checksums. The file names should be self-explanatory. The rat outputs are in *rat-0.2.out. The link to the voting thread can be found here : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200912.mbox/browser Please do review the artifacts and we would appreciate it if you could cast your vote by Jan 12. Thanks in advance Shanti - 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 RESULTS] Release Olio 0.2
This vote has passed with the following PMC members voting for it. A big thanks to them (and of course the Olio community) on getting this release done. Ant Elder +1 Craig Russell +1 Matt Hogstrom +1 I will send out a note once the release is made available for download. Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Fwd: [VOTE] Release Olio 0.2
A reminder to please take a look at the Olio release and Vote. Thanks Shanti -- Forwarded message -- From: Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com Date: Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 5:39 PM Subject: [VOTE] Release Olio 0.2 To: general@incubator.apache.org The Olio community has voted to release Olio 0.2. We now request the Incubator PMC for a vote. The proposed release artifacts are located at http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.2. There are 3 versions (PHP, Rails and Java) in both binary and source formats. Each package is available in both tar and zip format and include asc and md5 checksums. The file names should be self-explanatory. The rat outputs are in *rat-0.2.out. The link to the voting thread can be found here : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200912.mbox/browser Please do review the artifacts and we would appreciate it if you could cast your vote by Jan 12. Thanks in advance Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Olio 0.2
The Olio community has voted to release Olio 0.2. We now request the Incubator PMC for a vote. The proposed release artifacts are located at http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.2. There are 3 versions (PHP, Rails and Java) in both binary and source formats. Each package is available in both tar and zip format and include asc and md5 checksums. The file names should be self-explanatory. The rat outputs are in *rat-0.2.out. The link to the voting thread can be found here : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200912.mbox/browser Please do review the artifacts and we would appreciate it if you could cast your vote by Jan 12. Thanks in advance Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Olio 0.2
The Olio community has voted to release Olio 0.2. We now request the Incubator PMC for a vote. The proposed release artifacts are located at http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.2. There are 3 versions (PHP, Rails and Java) in both binary and source formats. Each package is available in both tar and zip format and include asc and md5 checksums. The file names should be self-explanatory. The rat outputs are in *rat-0.2.out. The link to the voting thread can be found here : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200912.mbox/browser Please do review the artifacts and we would appreciate it if you could cast your vote by Jan 12. Thanks in advance Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Olio 0.2
The Olio community has voted to release Olio 0.2. We now request the Incubator PMC for a vote. The proposed release artifacts are located at http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.2. There are 3 versions (PHP, Rails and Java) in both binary and source formats. Each package is available in both tar and zip format and include asc and md5 checksums. The file names should be self-explanatory. The rat outputs are in *rat-0.2.out. The link to the voting thread can be found here : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200912.mbox/browser Please do review the artifacts and cast your vote by Jan 11. Thanks in advance Shanti
Re: Insanity (of the release process)
I like Leo's proposal. With PMC members mentoring multiple projects, it is really a burden to try and get 3 votes for a release. Shanti Leo Simons wrote: On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 04:07, William A. Rowe, Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote: Leo Simons wrote: Here's what I understand: 1) Apache rule: all apache releases must be made by PMCs 2) Apache rule: a release needs at least 3 binding +1s and more +1s than -1s 3) from #1 and #2 it follows that all incubator releases must be made by the incubator PMC If you see a way to fix this mess, please do. I suspect rule #1 is the whopper that is just quite hard to get around and from it follows a lot of other mess. I don't know exactly where that rule comes from, but it is very old and it has always seemed very solid, too. IANAL. Mechanically, it's possible to recharter Incubator PMC as a board committee which has the authority to assemble and dissolve fully empowered PPMCs so they could begin binding votes from the outset. The 'P' would change from 'pre' to 'provisional'. I don't know if this is what we want to do, or not. The Board is trying to move away from Board committees. The IPMC is in charge of its operation. It can redefine the rules of releases as it pleases. The three +1 rule was developed to show that the PMC is in charge of the release, and is therefore legally liable for it. The IPMC can do whatever it likes around releases, as long as that process specifically claims or disclaims liability. Ok, that is interesting (and probably more workable than a big reorg). I still think we should claim liability. Could we, for example, have a release process that is lazy-by-default from the IPMC side and still claim that the ASF gets liability? for example, to release: 1) PPMC must vote for the release according to their rules (which should at least match the 3 +1 / majority rule requirements) 2) at least one PMC member must vote +1 (usually the mentor) 3) if there are no -1 votes, the PPMC sends the general@ list a request for a release ACK, after they get that ACK from a PMC member, they wait for 72 hours, and if there are still no -1s, the release is approved. 4) if there are any -1 votes, then the rule becomes the normal 3 +1s from PMC members / majority Downside: * more complex * increased dependency on single person to teach the basics Upside: * better reflects relationship between incubator and PPMC * more responsibility for project * hopefully fewer stalled releases thoughts? Leo - 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
Results of Olio 0.1 Release vote
The following persons have voted in favor of releasing Olio 0.1 (artifacts posted at http://people.apache.org/~/shanti/olio_0.1). - Committers; Akara Sucharitakul, William Sobel, Sheetal Patel, Shanti Subramanyam - Additional users/developers: Amanda Waite, Richard McDougall, Prashant Srinivasan - Mentors: Craig Russell, Matt Hogstrom, Henning Schmiedehausen - Additional Incubator PMC members: Robert Burrell Donkin This completes our vote and the release is now published. Thanks to all who took the time to help review the release. Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1
I need one more +1 PMC member vote to get this release out. Can someone else please vote ? The mail thread is here : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200904.mbox/ajax/%3c49e60a04.6020...@sun.com%3e Shanti On 04/23/09 08:55, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:39 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 23/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: sebb wrote: snip But seriously, without these files, we will have to somehow go out and manufacture image/pdf files at install time - uploading files is a big part of a web2.0 workload these days (and for sites like flickr the major workload). FWIW for this kind of thing, i start with the Apache Software License, Version 2.0 in an editor (with a save a PDF option) save to PDF then convert to a binary image format Does anyone else see a serious issue with these files ? I withdraw my -1 vote. i'm now +1 - robert - 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 Olio 0.1
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:39 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 23/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: sebb wrote: snip But seriously, without these files, we will have to somehow go out and manufacture image/pdf files at install time - uploading files is a big part of a web2.0 workload these days (and for sites like flickr the major workload). FWIW for this kind of thing, i start with the Apache Software License, Version 2.0 in an editor (with a save a PDF option) save to PDF then convert to a binary image format We will do that for the pdf file next time around. It is nice to have real pictures for the images though as they are visible if you use a browser for testing. Does anyone else see a serious issue with these files ? I withdraw my -1 vote. i'm now +1 Thank you. - robert - 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 Olio 0.1
Thanks for the reversal of the -1. But I still need a +1 ? Shanti sebb wrote: On 23/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: sebb wrote: On 23/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: On 04/22/09 10:35, sebb wrote: On 16/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: On 04/15/09 18:15, sebb wrote: On 16/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: Thank you very much for your very prompt review. Answers to your questions below. Shanti sebb wrote: The OlioDriver.jar file contains a smaller OlioDriver.jar file. This is very confusing; one of the jars should be renamed. This is the format of the Faban (http://faban.sunsource.net) Driver jar - the user never has to do anything with it as the tool will automatically unjar and put everything in it's right place. The binary olio file contains several .patch and .diff files. These don't seem correct for a binary file. What is their purpose? These files are part of the 3rd party plugin fixture_replacement2. Since we tend to include 3rd party code as is (for easier upgrade), I think it might be better to leave them as they are. But why are they in the binary rails jar, rather than in just the source jar? There is no difference between the source and binary code for rails (or php for that matter) since these are interpreted languages. The only difference between the source and binary packages of Olio is the geocoder and workload - these are written in Java so the binary packages have the OlioDriver.jar and geocoder.jar and the source packages have the corresponding source dirs. That does not explain why the diffs and patch files are present in the binary jar, because as far as I can tell they are not intended to be interpreted by rails. Are they actually *needed* at run-time? I really don't know. As I said, there is no concept of 'binary' for scripting languages - the source is the binary. I will try and investigate this matter for the next release if it's not a major problem to leave them here for now. I understand that there is no binary for scripting languages, and therefore .js and .rb files appear in both source and binary archives. However, the .diff and .patch files are scripts for a patch program, which is used to modify source files. Are such patches really applied at run-time? Seems rather wasteful to me if so. But I agree that could be fixed later. The source PHP file contains several jars; I would expect these to be in the binary archive only. It also contains the file event.pdf which does not seem to belong in the archive (or indeed in SVN). These are third-party jars. They are included as a convenience to make it easier to build and run the source. What about the event.pdf file? This is a resource file used by the web application. If you notice there are several image files as well - these are all static files used by the web app. What about the license for the event.pdf file? Is that also AL licensed? All the resource files are created as part of the apache project, so they are all Apache licensed. According to its properties, the event.pdf file was created in 1999 and last modified in 2004. AFAIK, that is well before the Apache project started. The file event.jpg was created in 2006, which was also before the project, and is a picture of 5 real people. Hopefully they have given permission for their photos to be published. This project was started a long time ago at Sun - all of the code including these files was then donated to apache. Neither appears to be present in the binary file, so I'm not sure how the web application can use them. They do exist in the binary package - they are part
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1
It has been a week since I sent this request for a VOTE. Craig and sebb have reviewed it. Would really appreciate if someone else can take a look and vote. sebb - if you are satisfied with the responses to your questions, can you please vote ? Thanks Shanti Original Message Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1 Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:20:32 -0700 From: Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org, shanti.subraman...@sun.com Organization: Sun Microsystems To: general@incubator.apache.org References: 49e60a04.6020...@sun.com Here is some additional information : . The following people have cast their Vote in favor of this release: - Committers; Akara Sucharitakul, William Sobel, Sheetal Patel, Shanti Subramanyam - Additional users/developers: Amanda Waite, - Mentors: Craig Russell . Craig has reviewed the licensed and his comments can be viewed at http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200904.mbox/%3c85fd5a49-08f5-49c0-b2ed-ddfc47713...@sun.com%3e The license for attachment_fu and white_list rails plugins is available at http://svn.techno-weenie.net/projects/plugins/LICENSE. Thanks Shanti On 04/15/09 09:23, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE wrote: The Olio community has voted and approved this first binary release of Olio. We are now asking for a Vote of the Incubator PMC to publish this release. The release includes both the PHP and Rails versions of Olio. The release artificats and RAT reports are available here : http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.1/ The mail thread and Vote results from Olio community : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200904.mbox/ajax/%3c49dd6496.9010...@sun.com%3e Thanks Shanti - 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 Olio 0.1
On 04/22/09 10:35, sebb wrote: On 16/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: On 04/15/09 18:15, sebb wrote: On 16/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: Thank you very much for your very prompt review. Answers to your questions below. Shanti sebb wrote: The OlioDriver.jar file contains a smaller OlioDriver.jar file. This is very confusing; one of the jars should be renamed. This is the format of the Faban (http://faban.sunsource.net) Driver jar - the user never has to do anything with it as the tool will automatically unjar and put everything in it's right place. The binary olio file contains several .patch and .diff files. These don't seem correct for a binary file. What is their purpose? These files are part of the 3rd party plugin fixture_replacement2. Since we tend to include 3rd party code as is (for easier upgrade), I think it might be better to leave them as they are. But why are they in the binary rails jar, rather than in just the source jar? There is no difference between the source and binary code for rails (or php for that matter) since these are interpreted languages. The only difference between the source and binary packages of Olio is the geocoder and workload - these are written in Java so the binary packages have the OlioDriver.jar and geocoder.jar and the source packages have the corresponding source dirs. That does not explain why the diffs and patch files are present in the binary jar, because as far as I can tell they are not intended to be interpreted by rails. Are they actually *needed* at run-time? I really don't know. As I said, there is no concept of 'binary' for scripting languages - the source is the binary. I will try and investigate this matter for the next release if it's not a major problem to leave them here for now. The source PHP file contains several jars; I would expect these to be in the binary archive only. It also contains the file event.pdf which does not seem to belong in the archive (or indeed in SVN). These are third-party jars. They are included as a convenience to make it easier to build and run the source. What about the event.pdf file? This is a resource file used by the web application. If you notice there are several image files as well - these are all static files used by the web app. What about the license for the event.pdf file? Is that also AL licensed? All the resource files are created as part of the apache project, so they are all Apache licensed. Shanti Thanks Shanti On 04/15/09 09:23, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE wrote: The Olio community has voted and approved this first binary release of Olio. We are now asking for a Vote of the Incubator PMC to publish this release. The release includes both the PHP and Rails versions of Olio. The release artificats and RAT reports are available here : http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.1/ The mail thread and Vote results from Olio community : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200904.mbox/ajax/%3c49dd6496.9010...@sun.com%3e Thanks Shanti - 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 Apache Olio 0.1
sebb wrote: On 23/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: On 04/22/09 10:35, sebb wrote: On 16/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: On 04/15/09 18:15, sebb wrote: On 16/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: Thank you very much for your very prompt review. Answers to your questions below. Shanti sebb wrote: The OlioDriver.jar file contains a smaller OlioDriver.jar file. This is very confusing; one of the jars should be renamed. This is the format of the Faban (http://faban.sunsource.net) Driver jar - the user never has to do anything with it as the tool will automatically unjar and put everything in it's right place. The binary olio file contains several .patch and .diff files. These don't seem correct for a binary file. What is their purpose? These files are part of the 3rd party plugin fixture_replacement2. Since we tend to include 3rd party code as is (for easier upgrade), I think it might be better to leave them as they are. But why are they in the binary rails jar, rather than in just the source jar? There is no difference between the source and binary code for rails (or php for that matter) since these are interpreted languages. The only difference between the source and binary packages of Olio is the geocoder and workload - these are written in Java so the binary packages have the OlioDriver.jar and geocoder.jar and the source packages have the corresponding source dirs. That does not explain why the diffs and patch files are present in the binary jar, because as far as I can tell they are not intended to be interpreted by rails. Are they actually *needed* at run-time? I really don't know. As I said, there is no concept of 'binary' for scripting languages - the source is the binary. I will try and investigate this matter for the next release if it's not a major problem to leave them here for now. I understand that there is no binary for scripting languages, and therefore .js and .rb files appear in both source and binary archives. However, the .diff and .patch files are scripts for a patch program, which is used to modify source files. Are such patches really applied at run-time? Seems rather wasteful to me if so. But I agree that could be fixed later. The source PHP file contains several jars; I would expect these to be in the binary archive only. It also contains the file event.pdf which does not seem to belong in the archive (or indeed in SVN). These are third-party jars. They are included as a convenience to make it easier to build and run the source. What about the event.pdf file? This is a resource file used by the web application. If you notice there are several image files as well - these are all static files used by the web app. What about the license for the event.pdf file? Is that also AL licensed? All the resource files are created as part of the apache project, so they are all Apache licensed. According to its properties, the event.pdf file was created in 1999 and last modified in 2004. AFAIK, that is well before the Apache project started. The file event.jpg was created in 2006, which was also before the project, and is a picture of 5 real people. Hopefully they have given permission for their photos to be published. This project was started a long time ago at Sun - all of the code including these files was then donated to apache. Neither appears to be present in the binary file, so I'm not sure how the web application can use them. They do exist in the binary package - they are part of OlioDriver.jar. Note that there are other jpg files in the same directory with much the same contents: event_thumb.jpg, person.jpg and person_thumb.jpg. AFAICT, these files don't belong in SVN or in any of the archives. These files are required at run-time. The driver uses these resource files to upload content to the web application - please see the source code under 'workload/.../driver'. My vote is -1 based on the above. I guess I don't really understand what the objection to having these files are. If you're concerned about the photo itself (it was actually just taken by one of the engineers), I can replace it with a picture of me although you may actually prefer the current image :-) But seriously, without these files, we will have to somehow go out and manufacture image/pdf files at install time
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1
On 04/15/09 18:15, sebb wrote: On 16/04/2009, Shanti Subramanyam shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: Thank you very much for your very prompt review. Answers to your questions below. Shanti sebb wrote: The OlioDriver.jar file contains a smaller OlioDriver.jar file. This is very confusing; one of the jars should be renamed. This is the format of the Faban (http://faban.sunsource.net) Driver jar - the user never has to do anything with it as the tool will automatically unjar and put everything in it's right place. The binary olio file contains several .patch and .diff files. These don't seem correct for a binary file. What is their purpose? These files are part of the 3rd party plugin fixture_replacement2. Since we tend to include 3rd party code as is (for easier upgrade), I think it might be better to leave them as they are. But why are they in the binary rails jar, rather than in just the source jar? There is no difference between the source and binary code for rails (or php for that matter) since these are interpreted languages. The only difference between the source and binary packages of Olio is the geocoder and workload - these are written in Java so the binary packages have the OlioDriver.jar and geocoder.jar and the source packages have the corresponding source dirs. The source PHP file contains several jars; I would expect these to be in the binary archive only. It also contains the file event.pdf which does not seem to belong in the archive (or indeed in SVN). These are third-party jars. They are included as a convenience to make it easier to build and run the source. What about the event.pdf file? This is a resource file used by the web application. If you notice there are several image files as well - these are all static files used by the web app. Shanti Thanks Shanti On 04/15/09 09:23, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE wrote: The Olio community has voted and approved this first binary release of Olio. We are now asking for a Vote of the Incubator PMC to publish this release. The release includes both the PHP and Rails versions of Olio. The release artificats and RAT reports are available here : http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.1/ The mail thread and Vote results from Olio community : http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-olio-dev/200904.mbox/ajax/%3c49dd6496.9010...@sun.com%3e Thanks Shanti - 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 Olio 0.1
sebb wrote: On 30/03/2009, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: This is the first binary release of the Apache Olio project. We have fixed many bugs and have tested the releases to ensure there are no major problems. All package names have been changed to org.apache.olio. We have updated many source license/header files and added the LICENSE, NOTICE files. The release artifacts are available at : http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.1 It would be helpful to have a pointer to the SVN tag. SVN : https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/olio/tags/release-0.1/ Each source and binary package has a MD5 and a Signature. Only tar.gz packages provided. Normally zip is provided as well. I can create zip files - didn't realize that it was a requirement. MD5 hashes are OK, but cannot check sigs as key does not appear to be uploaded to a server. Can you provide a link to the KEYS file in SVN? I have now uploaded the KEYS file to http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.1. The output of RAT is included in *-rat-output.txt. Cannot read these: You don't have permission to access /~shanti/olio_0.1/apache-olio-php-0.1.rat-output.txt on this server. You don't have permission to access /~shanti/olio_0.1/apache-olio-rails-0.1.rat-output.txt on this server. Fixed permissions. The NOTICE file in the archives does not follow the standard: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice I shall fix this. Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1
Sorry about that. This was because of my lack of understanding of the process. I have removed the link now and will re-distribute artifacts after approval. Shanti sebb wrote: I've just noticed that the download links for 0.1 are already in place at http://incubator.apache.org/olio/downloads.html and seem to be working. I thought the release vote had to succeed before publishing anything? See: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#release-distribution On 31/03/2009, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 30/03/2009, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com wrote: This is the first binary release of the Apache Olio project. We have fixed many bugs and have tested the releases to ensure there are no major problems. All package names have been changed to org.apache.olio. We have updated many source license/header files and added the LICENSE, NOTICE files. The release artifacts are available at : http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.1 It would be helpful to have a pointer to the SVN tag. Each source and binary package has a MD5 and a Signature. Only tar.gz packages provided. Normally zip is provided as well. MD5 hashes are OK, but cannot check sigs as key does not appear to be uploaded to a server. Can you provide a link to the KEYS file in SVN? The output of RAT is included in *-rat-output.txt. Cannot read these: You don't have permission to access /~shanti/olio_0.1/apache-olio-php-0.1.rat-output.txt on this server. You don't have permission to access /~shanti/olio_0.1/apache-olio-rails-0.1.rat-output.txt on this server. The NOTICE file in the archives does not follow the standard: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice Shanti - 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 Olio 0.1
Craig L Russell wrote: On Mar 31, 2009, at 8:18 AM, sebb wrote: All package names have been changed to org.apache.olio. We have updated many source license/header files and added the LICENSE, NOTICE files. However, the RAT report shows that there are lots of files without the correct headers. AIUI, the correct headers are a *requirement* for a release: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#release-legal-audit There's a document somewhere describing how to deal with existing copyright headers. It should be referenced somewhere in the Incubator documentation. Generally, copyright notices should be moved from their original location in the source and put into the NOTICE file. Since there is already the Sun copyright notice in NOTICE, the original can simply be replaced by the Apache license. The history in svn has the original copyright so it's not lost. There are different forms of the Apache license depending on the type of file, e.g. java source has the /** style format, xml would have the !-- format, shell scripts would have # format, etc. If a file format cannot accept any comments (rare) then this should be noted in a discussion of the RAT output in the vote message. Other than the Sun copyright notice (which has already been moved and all source files modified with the correct Apache notice), we have no other copyright notices to move. The few other notices are from third-party plugins which according to http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party should be left where they are - so I didn't touch them. However, the big issue we have is that there is a lot of generated code and we can't insert any notices in them. I assume this is acceptable. We have binary files (jpgs, etc.) as well as a lot of third-party code with no notices at all which is what RAT is flagging. For all third-party code, we had verified the licenses before checking in the code to svn (BSD, MIT or ruby licenses). Craig Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1
Since we have two packages with different LICENSE and NOTICE files, is it okay to name them as follows : . LICENSE_php.txt, NOTICE_php.txt . LICENSE_rails.txt, NOTICE_rails.txt Shanti Craig L Russell wrote: On Mar 31, 2009, at 12:01 PM, sebb wrote: I'm not convinced that the license permits Ruby code to be added to SVN. Here is the a reference I found to the use of works under the Ruby license: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html This does not allows projects to include Ruby-licensed code. There are a few parts in the olio distribution that we need to consider: 1. Olio code written in Ruby that we wrote and license under Apache license. 2. Unmodified third party Ruby code under the Ruby license. The resolved.html says we can have an external dependency on these files. We just cannot distribute them. So we need to remove the files from the distribution and provide instructions for our users how to obtain and install them. I'd guess that the Rails implementation (assuming that we depend on some specific unmodified version of Rails) falls into this category. Cool. Just need to copy the licenses into the NOTICE. Surely the licenses go into the LICENSE file (verbatim or as links)? Verbatim is preferred, as we can't assume that a link can be followed just because a user has obtained the distribution. Required attributions and copyright notices go in the NOTICE file. RIght. No matter how many times I read them, I cannot remember the rules without having them in front of me. Craig Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@sun.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1
This is the first binary release of the Apache Olio project. We have fixed many bugs and have tested the releases to ensure there are no major problems. All package names have been changed to org.apache.olio. We have updated many source license/header files and added the LICENSE, NOTICE files. The release artifacts are available at : http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.1 Each source and binary package has a MD5 and a Signature. The output of RAT is included in *-rat-output.txt. Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[Fwd: [VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1]
Re-sending with corrected alias. Shanti Original Message Subject:[VOTE] Release Apache Olio 0.1 Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 15:09:57 -0700 From: Shanti Subramanyam - PAE shanti.subraman...@sun.com Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org, shanti.subraman...@sun.com Organization: Sun Microsystems To: general@incubator.apache.org CC: d...@incubator.apache.org This is the first binary release of the Apache Olio project. We have fixed many bugs and have tested the releases to ensure there are no major problems. All package names have been changed to org.apache.olio. We have updated many source license/header files and added the LICENSE, NOTICE files. The release artifacts are available at : http://people.apache.org/~shanti/olio_0.1 Each source and binary package has a MD5 and a Signature. The output of RAT is included in *-rat-output.txt. Shanti - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] accept Olio into incubation
developers are employed by Sun Microsystems. Relationships with Other Apache Products None in particular, except that Apache HTTPD is the most common place to run PHP, and which the initial PHP implementation uses. A Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand We believe in the processes, systems, and framework Apache has put in place. The brand is nice, but is not why we wish to come to Apache. DocumentationInitial Source Sun Microsystems Inc. intends to donate code for their PHP implementation of the sample events application as well as code to drive load against the application. UC Berkeley intends to donate code for the Ruby on Rails implementation. This code is still a work in progress and will be provided primarily as a starting place for a much more robust, community- developed implementation. External DependenciesRequired Resources Developer mailing lists [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] A subversion repository A JIRA issue tracker Initial Committers • Akara Sucharitakul [EMAIL PROTECTED] Shanti Subramanyam [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sheetal Patil [EMAIL PROTECTED] Binu John [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kim Lichong [EMAIL PROTECTED] William Sobel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Arthur Klepchukov [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] SponsorsChampion • Craig Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nominated Mentors • Craig Russell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Henning Schmiedehausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rick Hillegas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sponsoring Entity The Apache Incubator. Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DISCUSS] Names for the Web2.0kit
Hmm - I'm not sure about this. Introducing the 'J' letter will give a Java connotation to the whole thing. The proposed PHP and Rails implementations will have no Java components in them. I'd rather stick with a more generic name. Shanti Bruno Borges wrote: Olio sounds good, but there's nothing related with Java, Web, frameworks or anything else... (or, is just me who couldn't find any information about this word?) So, because of the lack of co-relation between Olio and Java Webkits, I found that there's an word which could fit better: Jawi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jawi Could also be an acronymous of Java Webkits Incubator =) cheers, Bruno Borges William Sobel-2 wrote: On Sep 22, 2008, at 10:14 AM, Janne Jalkanen wrote: Just in case nobody mentioned this to you yet: Olio is the Finnish word for object as in object relational database or object- oriented programming. You may or may not find this suitable. :-) Unfortunately, it also means that there are quite a few Finnish IT companies with the word olio in their name. Also, olio.fi is owned by a Finnish web design company (though they haven't put anything on it yet). Again, this may or may not be suitable. :-/ I vote for Olio. I doubt if we'll find any string of sounds that won't be in use someplace. Apache is widely used for many corporations and this doesn't seem to be an issue. I think the OO relationship is a positive. Best Regards, Will Sobel Visiting Lecturer RADLab - UC Berkeley - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] accept Olio into incubation
. Spring framework, Python etc. Current Status This is a new project with some sample not-ready-for-prime-time code. Meritocracy The initial developers are very familiar with meritocratic open source development, both at Apache and elsewhere. Apache was chosen specifically because the initial developers want to encourage this style of development for the project. Community Olio seeks to create developer and user communities during incubation. Core Developers The initial core developers are Sun Microsystems, Inc. employees, and faculty and students at UC Berkeley. We hope to expand this very quickly. Alignment The developers of the Olio want to work with the Apache Software Foundation specifically because Apache has proven to provide a strong foundation and set of practices for community-based development. Known RisksOrphaned products This project has a lot of enthusiasm among the core developers, has ongoing development, and is not orphaned. Inexperience with Open Source The initial developers are well-versed in open source methodologies and practices. Homogenous Developers The initial group of developers is from two organizations. We would like to expand this and that is a primary reason for bringing this project to Apache. Reliance on Salaried Developers Although part of the initial development team are students, the core developers are employed by Sun Microsystems. Relationships with Other Apache Products None in particular, except that Apache HTTPD is the most common place to run PHP, and which the initial PHP implementation uses. A Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand We believe in the processes, systems, and framework Apache has put in place. The brand is nice, but is not why we wish to come to Apache. DocumentationInitial Source Sun Microsystems Inc. intends to donate code for their PHP implementation of the sample events application as well as code to drive load against the application. UC Berkeley intends to donate code for the Ruby on Rails implementation. This code is still a work in progress and will be provided primarily as a starting place for a much more robust, community- developed implementation. External DependenciesRequired Resources Developer mailing listsmoin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] A subversion repository A JIRA issue tracker Initial Committers • Akara Sucharitakul moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Shanti Subramanyam moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sheetal Patil moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Binu John moin-email.png[EMAIL PROTECTED] Kim Lichong moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] William Sobel moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Arthur Klepchukov moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig Russell moin-email.png[EMAIL PROTECTED] SponsorsChampion • Craig Russell moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nominated Mentors • Craig Russell moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Henning Schmiedehausen moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Matt Hogstrom moin-email.png [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rick Hillegas moin-email.png[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sponsoring Entity The Apache Incubator. Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DISCUSS] Names for the Web2.0kit
Olio is short and easy. I don't like the hodgepdge defintion. But then the dictionary also says medley, potpourri etc. which have more positive connotations. So either Ketero or Olio is fine. Shanti On 09/20/08 09:52, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: We seem to have some way to check these through nameprotect.com. Once we narrowed down to two or three candidates, we can check these there. Ketero sounds a lot like Kitaro. :-) Olio is nice (and short, which I like). Ciao Henning On Sat, 2008-09-20 at 02:44 -0700, Craig L Russell wrote: There's a software consulting company in Bangalore called Sonata Software. Too close for comfort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonata_Software Looking on Google, Olio, Potpourri don't appear to have conflicts. Mix Match is a PC product for photoshopping picture frames. Not really a conflict to me. Shanti Software is a consulting services company. Too close for me. Ketero is ok. One of the top hits on Google is this email thread! But Katera Software is a similar-sounding name. Cetero is a medical research company. Not a conflict. My favorites, in order: Ketero Olio Potpourri MixMatch Craig On Sep 16, 2008, at 1:12 PM, Shanti Subramanyam - PAE wrote: Since I didn't see any response to the proposed names below, here are a couple more : potpourri sonata (4 movements: web/cache/objectstore/db ? ) Shanti Original Message Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Web20Kit: A Web 2.0 technology evaluation kit Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:51:30 -0700 From: Shanti Subramanyam [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org To: general@incubator.apache.org References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here are some suggestions for alternate names : Olio Ratatouille MixMatch (3 above indicating we're trying to mix and match components) Ketero (Ethiopian I believe for 'appointment') or Catero Shanti Craig L Russell wrote: Hi Martin, On Aug 26, 2008, at 7:51 PM, Martin Cooper wrote: Yeah, an association with WebKit was my first assumption as well. Agreed. New name.initiate().run(). - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[DISCUSS] Names for the Web2.0kit
Since I didn't see any response to the proposed names below, here are a couple more : potpourri sonata (4 movements: web/cache/objectstore/db ? ) Shanti Original Message Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Web20Kit: A Web 2.0 technology evaluation kit Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 09:51:30 -0700 From: Shanti Subramanyam [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org To: general@incubator.apache.org References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Here are some suggestions for alternate names : Olio Ratatouille MixMatch (3 above indicating we're trying to mix and match components) Ketero (Ethiopian I believe for 'appointment') or Catero Shanti Craig L Russell wrote: Hi Martin, On Aug 26, 2008, at 7:51 PM, Martin Cooper wrote: Yeah, an association with WebKit was my first assumption as well. Agreed. New name.initiate().run(). - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DISCUSS] Web20Kit: A Web 2.0 technology evaluation kit
Here are some suggestions for alternate names : Olio Ratatouille MixMatch (3 above indicating we're trying to mix and match components) Ketero (Ethiopian I believe for 'appointment') or Catero Shanti Craig L Russell wrote: Hi Martin, On Aug 26, 2008, at 7:51 PM, Martin Cooper wrote: Yeah, an association with WebKit was my first assumption as well. Agreed. New name.initiate().run(). - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
