[RESULT 2nd try][VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
Ok, let give this a second try: I count the following +1: Chris Mattmann, Alan Cabrera, Bill Rowe, Bernd Fondermann (all binding), Owen O'Malley (in process of being added to Incubator PMC) Greg Reddin, Jerome Boulon, Leif Hedstrom (non-binding). There were no other explicit votes cast. However, some discussion about going directly to TLP. Please note that the Hadoop previously voted -1 for letting Chukwa propose for TLP. Please check the vote result and speak up now if you disagree with the tally and making this vote effective. (Ideally, create new thredads.) Thanks, Bernd On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 19:29, Eric Yang wrote: > Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. > > The proposal is posted at: > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal > > Thanks > > Regards, > Eric > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator
On 7/1/2010 11:19 AM, ant elder wrote: > > I've been suggesting it would be simpler for Chukwa to go directly to > TLP but if thats not going to happen then you have my support to > incubate if thats what they really want to do, and I agree a new vote > might making things clearer. It seems a shame to require more renaming > of mailing lists etc than necessary, another alternative could be to > just keep the existing naming that Chukwa currently uses during the > incubation and only do renaming when graduating to TLP. That avoids > one renaming and might get more IPMC votes for the proposal than it > did when using the TLP naming. I believe this is best, to simply hold over the existing hadoop-related naming, with clear indication on the web pages that this subproject is now -incubating, reflect those on the incubator status page, for the handful of months it takes to elevate the effort to TLP status. We will need a chukwa-priv...@incubator.apache.org, but I think that's about it. But we should probably announce this [Vote] as passed, start a second vote on gene...@incubator and gene...@hadoop permitting these old hadoop.a.o based list addresses and website/download paths to persist. Moving svn itself is pretty trivial, and I'd suggest we do this to make the svn permissions simpler for incubator PMC members. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Chris Douglas wrote: > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Bernd Fondermann > wrote: > [snip] > > Fair point. > > The naming debate is only about the location of the project in svn and > the mailing lists, right? Conducting the vote with this variable has > become more arduous than all the INFRA and site work it implies; let's > drop it. Eric, could you just change the naming in the proposal to > match the convention? Unless there are other open issues, a straight, > up/down vote should be possible with that modification. > > Bernd, would you mind conducting the next vote so that it runs to your > satisfaction? > >> IMHO, Either Hadoop decides to run a TLP movement, or the Incubator >> conducts a proper vote. > > The Hadoop PMC vote to recommend Chukwa as a TLP directly did not pass. -C > I've been suggesting it would be simpler for Chukwa to go directly to TLP but if thats not going to happen then you have my support to incubate if thats what they really want to do, and I agree a new vote might making things clearer. It seems a shame to require more renaming of mailing lists etc than necessary, another alternative could be to just keep the existing naming that Chukwa currently uses during the incubation and only do renaming when graduating to TLP. That avoids one renaming and might get more IPMC votes for the proposal than it did when using the TLP naming. ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:26 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: [snip] Fair point. The naming debate is only about the location of the project in svn and the mailing lists, right? Conducting the vote with this variable has become more arduous than all the INFRA and site work it implies; let's drop it. Eric, could you just change the naming in the proposal to match the convention? Unless there are other open issues, a straight, up/down vote should be possible with that modification. Bernd, would you mind conducting the next vote so that it runs to your satisfaction? > IMHO, Either Hadoop decides to run a TLP movement, or the Incubator > conducts a proper vote. The Hadoop PMC vote to recommend Chukwa as a TLP directly did not pass. -C - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator
Just a second. (Dropping TO gene...@hadoop.a.o.) Please don't confuse DISCUSSION and VOTE. BTW, it's best practice for a Incubator proposal (or any other type of initiative at Apache) to first have a DISCUSSION or PROPOSAL thread, and then have a vote afterwards, when thread hijacking is less likely. On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 18:42, Eric Yang wrote: > Original incubator proposal: > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal > > Vote put forward to incubator: > > 1. recommend TLP with guides to help the initial pmc, > 2. accept incubating with tlp resource naming, but -incubating release > naming > 3. accept incubating requiring all incubator naming conventions, that might > help the incubator simplify this decision. The original vote was about said proposal, not about options. You are tallying a vote that did not take place. > Result of the vote: > > Option 1) Ant Elder, Eric Yang, William A. Rowe Jr. > Option 2) Ari Rabkin, Jerome Boulon, Chris Douglas, Greg Reddin > Option 3) Bernd Fondermann You seem to have missed a number of votes. Could you please identify binding votes for a proper tally? > > Owen O'Malley +1 on proposal > > I am not sure about Chris Mattmann¹s position, but he raised the question > about TLP. > Is it ok to keep hadoop naming until we graduate to TLP, hence, we only > rename once? ³-incubating² will be added to release artifacts. > > What is next? IMHO, Either Hadoop decides to run a TLP movement, or the Incubator conducts a proper vote. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator
Welp, I think Owen is probably the best judge here since he has seen them in Hadoop-ville, and since he probably is way more familiar with the code and its eventual PMC members than I am. I'll amend my VOTE then. +1 to Incubation, with TLP-naming (in other words, option #2). I'll try and join the lists and help where I can too, cycles-willing :) Cheers, Chris On 6/30/10 11:23 AM, "Owen O'Malley" wrote: On Jun 30, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > On 6/30/10 9:42 AM, "Eric Yang" wrote: > > Original incubator proposal: > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal > > Vote put forward to incubator: > > 1. recommend TLP with guides to help the initial pmc, > 2. accept incubating with tlp resource naming, but -incubating release > naming > 3. accept incubating requiring all incubator naming conventions, > that might > help the incubator simplify this decision. > > Result of the vote: > > Option 1) Ant Elder, Eric Yang, William A. Rowe Jr. > Option 2) Ari Rabkin, Jerome Boulon, Chris Douglas, Greg Reddin > Option 3) Bernd Fondermann > > Owen O'Malley +1 on proposal Sorry, I meant to vote for option 2. I think that it would be good to have more visibility in before they become a TLP. They also need to figure out how to add new committers to their project. -- Owen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++
Re: [Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Jun 30, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: On 6/30/10 9:42 AM, "Eric Yang" wrote: Original incubator proposal: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal Vote put forward to incubator: 1. recommend TLP with guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource naming, but -incubating release naming 3. accept incubating requiring all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify this decision. Result of the vote: Option 1) Ant Elder, Eric Yang, William A. Rowe Jr. Option 2) Ari Rabkin, Jerome Boulon, Chris Douglas, Greg Reddin Option 3) Bernd Fondermann Owen O'Malley +1 on proposal Sorry, I meant to vote for option 2. I think that it would be good to have more visibility in before they become a TLP. They also need to figure out how to add new committers to their project. -- Owen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator
Hi Guys, My recommendation would be Option #1 - I think you guys would be OK as a TLP with some guidance, I'm not sure the Incubator will add anything that you guys can't learn on your own as a TLP with some mentorship from Incubator PMC'ers or ASF members helping you (Owen is an ASF member and his guidance would certainly help out). Helping you can mean just monitoring the private@ lists (like any ASF member can anyways), or sitting on your PMC for 6 months, and then leaving afterwards, IMO. Of course those sitting on the Chukwa PMC from Incubator-ville and who aren't as familiar with Chukwa code should be there more to help with guidance on releases/etc., then to actually influence the code base. Sorry for not getting back to you guys before now. I also want to point out that since I'm unlikely to be available to pick up a shovel and dig on this one, I don't want to block you guys doing the work. So if there is strong feeling for any of the other options, feel free to move forward. I think you guys have a great project and are closer to TLP maturity than Incubator community growing on this one... My 2 cents, Chris On 6/30/10 9:42 AM, "Eric Yang" wrote: Original incubator proposal: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal Vote put forward to incubator: 1. recommend TLP with guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource naming, but -incubating release naming 3. accept incubating requiring all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify this decision. Result of the vote: Option 1) Ant Elder, Eric Yang, William A. Rowe Jr. Option 2) Ari Rabkin, Jerome Boulon, Chris Douglas, Greg Reddin Option 3) Bernd Fondermann Owen O'Malley +1 on proposal I am not sure about Chris Mattmann's position, but he raised the question about TLP. Is it ok to keep hadoop naming until we graduate to TLP, hence, we only rename once? "-incubating" will be added to release artifacts. What is next? Regards, Eric - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++
[Result][Vote] Move Chukwa to incubator
Original incubator proposal: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal Vote put forward to incubator: 1. recommend TLP with guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource naming, but -incubating release naming 3. accept incubating requiring all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify this decision. Result of the vote: Option 1) Ant Elder, Eric Yang, William A. Rowe Jr. Option 2) Ari Rabkin, Jerome Boulon, Chris Douglas, Greg Reddin Option 3) Bernd Fondermann Owen O'Malley +1 on proposal I am not sure about Chris Mattmann¹s position, but he raised the question about TLP. Is it ok to keep hadoop naming until we graduate to TLP, hence, we only rename once? ³-incubating² will be added to release artifacts. What is next? Regards, Eric - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
I agree with Jerome and Chris. I also would opt for plan #2: incubation with TLP names. --Ari On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Chris Douglas wrote: > I agree with the analysis from Jerome and Greg. All three of Chukwa's > current committers are its original contributors. An important- and > often difficult- part of Apache community is growing and managing the > developers working on the project. Some experience adding people in > the Incubator would be valuable to members (both old and new) and > would result in a quorum less volatile than three. > > Given that the team is small and renaming will be expensive and > tedious, that requirement seems purely punitive. No positive reason > for it has been raised. So I am +1 (non-binding) for option (2), > incubation with TLP class naming, but incubation release naming. -- Ari Rabkin asrab...@gmail.com UC Berkeley Computer Science Department - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
> I meant, purely in terms of Hadoop putting forward the TLP motion to the > board, with incubator's endorsement. But let's let options play out and > find out what incubator recommends first. I wasn't suggesting that Hadoop > would have some additional responsibilities here, in terms of mentoring or > otherwise. Oh I see; sorry, I hadn't parsed that context correctly. As the Incubator makes its decision, I just want it to be clear that the Hadoop PMC is no better equipped to make decisions about Chukwa's leadership or membership. All parties are trying to recover from this oversight by recommending that Chukwa spend time in the Incubator, to assemble a community that can discharge that responsibility. It will likely be a brief stay; all the reasons ant cites are true, with minor qualifications already raised. The TLP alternative proposed (1)- adding PMC members not involved in Chukwa's development, but influencing the project direction and membership- seems contrary to the spirit the Incubator endeavors to instill. It will have more autonomy in incubation and an unencumbered life as a TLP, rather than a protracted semi-incubation period as a "supervised TLP." -C - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On 6/25/2010 12:40 PM, Chris Douglas wrote: >> >> But the Incubator doesn't just say yes/no. We can refer this back to Hadoop >> proposing this as a TLP, and even offer the list of mentors as observers, or >> members of the initial PMC. > > The Hadoop PMC is wholly unqualified to manage Chukwa. It voted to > recommend it to the Incubator so that it can gather a community > invested in its future and capable of meaningful consensus on the > challenges before it. Given that the very direction of the project has > been raised as an open issue, the benign neglect of the Hadoop PMC is > not a viable solution. -C I meant, purely in terms of Hadoop putting forward the TLP motion to the board, with incubator's endorsement. But let's let options play out and find out what incubator recommends first. I wasn't suggesting that Hadoop would have some additional responsibilities here, in terms of mentoring or otherwise. Thanks for all the rest of your observations. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
I agree with the analysis from Jerome and Greg. All three of Chukwa's current committers are its original contributors. An important- and often difficult- part of Apache community is growing and managing the developers working on the project. Some experience adding people in the Incubator would be valuable to members (both old and new) and would result in a quorum less volatile than three. Given that the team is small and renaming will be expensive and tedious, that requirement seems purely punitive. No positive reason for it has been raised. So I am +1 (non-binding) for option (2), incubation with TLP class naming, but incubation release naming. > Yes, it seems that Hadoop PMC should supervise the vote for the chair, with > a slightly frustrating cc list of all of the actual committers to chukwa. > That way, nominations and votes for chair are archived on a private list. > > But the Incubator doesn't just say yes/no. We can refer this back to Hadoop > proposing this as a TLP, and even offer the list of mentors as observers, or > members of the initial PMC. The Hadoop PMC is wholly unqualified to manage Chukwa. It voted to recommend it to the Incubator so that it can gather a community invested in its future and capable of meaningful consensus on the challenges before it. Given that the very direction of the project has been raised as an open issue, the benign neglect of the Hadoop PMC is not a viable solution. -C - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
Hi, As one of the initial contributor, I still think that the incubator road is the good one even if it's just for a short period of time. The incubator will gives us the ability to get some committers outside of the initial group of people and to mature the project. When we will have reach that point then TLP will make sense but not before that also the incubator road in my mind will help us in getting a better understanding of what our users really need; Is it a end-to-end product or more an SDK where user can take some part and build their own tools/products? I'm in favor of the SDK but this still need to be discussed/implemented. For all of this I vote for the incubator but in order to simplify the transition and for our current users I would like to keep the current naming convention. +1 incubator but with Chukwa's current naming convention. /Jerome, On 6/25/10 1:55 AM, "Bernd Fondermann" wrote: On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 21:21, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote: >> >>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa >>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a >>> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them >>> decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) >> >> I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a >> strawman ;-) > > Well folks, it's a fun debate and all, but it isn't helping bring this > vote to a conclusion :) Wasn't the debate started just for the sake of hijacking the vote thread? ;-) Seriously, [DISCUSS] before [VOTE] is always recommended. > Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead > and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this > time. > > If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with > guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource > naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring > all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify > this decision. I don't understand. The Hadoop community released a subproject for Incubation. The Incubator accepts or denies the proposal. In case of denial, the ball is in the Hadoop field again isn't it? > At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in > terms of resource creation and management; it would simply require the > group to vote for an initial chair/VP. Who is "the group"? The list of initial committers? This PMC? The Hadoop PMC? > If they are unsure of their group > yet, perhaps one of the other mentors would offer to serve as their chair > for the first six months, if they rather would do that? I'm still +1 to do proper Incubation. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:34 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > Yes, it seems that Hadoop PMC should supervise the vote for the chair, with > a slightly frustrating cc list of all of the actual committers to chukwa. > That way, nominations and votes for chair are archived on a private list. > > But the Incubator doesn't just say yes/no. We can refer this back to Hadoop > proposing this as a TLP, and even offer the list of mentors as observers, or > members of the initial PMC. What do the originators of the proposal think of this direction? It sounds like they want to be a TLP, but are not sure they are yet ready. That leaves a burning question in my mind: Why do they feel they need the Incubator, rather than the Hadoop PMC, to help them mature into a TLP? I supported the Incubator proposal as it was written because I'm not sure Chukwa is getting the mentoring they need in their current home. I figure the Incubator is a good place to do that. I also support using the TLP naming because I think the Incubator can give them the mentoring they need and set them on their way in good time, and I'd like to avoid an extra renaming step. I would support what Bill has suggested if it was put to a vote, and honestly, I can't really say if one direction is preferable over the other. So, for now, I still support the proposal that has been put to a vote. Greg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On 6/25/2010 3:55 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 21:21, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > >> Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead >> and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this >> time. >> >> If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with >> guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource >> naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring >> all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify >> this decision. > > I don't understand. The Hadoop community released a subproject for > Incubation. The Incubator accepts or denies the proposal. > In case of denial, the ball is in the Hadoop field again isn't it? Yes, it seems that Hadoop PMC should supervise the vote for the chair, with a slightly frustrating cc list of all of the actual committers to chukwa. That way, nominations and votes for chair are archived on a private list. But the Incubator doesn't just say yes/no. We can refer this back to Hadoop proposing this as a TLP, and even offer the list of mentors as observers, or members of the initial PMC. >> At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in >> terms of resource creation and management; it would simply require the >> group to vote for an initial chair/VP. > > Who is "the group"? The list of initial committers? This PMC? The Hadoop PMC? Group of proposed committers/actual contributors (it is existing code, there is svn history of who committed). >> If they are unsure of their group >> yet, perhaps one of the other mentors would offer to serve as their chair >> for the first six months, if they rather would do that? > > I'm still +1 to do proper Incubation. If that's the incubator's preference, I don't object, but I'm waiting for more than five people to be heard on this point of contention. You strongly want one option, ant strongly wants another, and we've heard few other voices. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 21:21, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote: >> >>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa >>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a >>> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them >>> decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) >> >> I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a >> strawman ;-) > > Well folks, it's a fun debate and all, but it isn't helping bring this > vote to a conclusion :) Wasn't the debate started just for the sake of hijacking the vote thread? ;-) Seriously, [DISCUSS] before [VOTE] is always recommended. > Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead > and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this > time. > > If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with > guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource > naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring > all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify > this decision. I don't understand. The Hadoop community released a subproject for Incubation. The Incubator accepts or denies the proposal. In case of denial, the ball is in the Hadoop field again isn't it? > At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in > terms of resource creation and management; it would simply require the > group to vote for an initial chair/VP. Who is "the group"? The list of initial committers? This PMC? The Hadoop PMC? > If they are unsure of their group > yet, perhaps one of the other mentors would offer to serve as their chair > for the first six months, if they rather would do that? I'm still +1 to do proper Incubation. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
+1 for 1. Regards, Eric On 6/24/10 12:21 PM, "William A. Rowe Jr." wrote: > On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote: >> >>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa >>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a >>> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them >>> decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) >> >> I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a >> strawman ;-) > > Well folks, it's a fun debate and all, but it isn't helping bring this > vote to a conclusion :) > > Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead > and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this > time. > > If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with > guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource > naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring > all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify > this decision. > > At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in > terms of resource creation and management; it would simply require the > group to vote for an initial chair/VP. If they are unsure of their group > yet, perhaps one of the other mentors would offer to serve as their chair > for the first six months, if they rather would do that? > > - > 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] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:21 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote: >> >>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa >>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a >>> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them >>> decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) >> >> I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a >> strawman ;-) > > Well folks, it's a fun debate and all, but it isn't helping bring this > vote to a conclusion :) > > Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead > and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this > time. > > If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with > guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource > naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring > all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify > this decision. > > At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in > terms of resource creation and management; Option 1. sounds most sensible to me too. ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
Hrm. I think my preference is for 1 or 2. Given that Chukwa already has a fair bit of infrastructure up and running, seems like fewer renames is better and would reduce user confusion. --Ari On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 3:21 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote: >> >>> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa >>> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a >>> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them >>> decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) >> >> I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a >> strawman ;-) > > Well folks, it's a fun debate and all, but it isn't helping bring this > vote to a conclusion :) > > Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead > and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this > time. > > If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with > guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource > naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring > all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify > this decision. > > At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in > terms of resource creation and management; it would simply require the > group to vote for an initial chair/VP. If they are unsure of their group > yet, perhaps one of the other mentors would offer to serve as their chair > for the first six months, if they rather would do that? > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > -- Ari Rabkin asrab...@gmail.com UC Berkeley Computer Science Department - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On 6/23/2010 8:12 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote: > >> IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa >> website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a >> TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them >> decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) > > I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a > strawman ;-) Well folks, it's a fun debate and all, but it isn't helping bring this vote to a conclusion :) Is anyone in agreement with ant? Otherwise we should just move ahead and can hold a separate vote on allowing tlp resource creation at this time. If the proposers want (Eric?) a three choice vote, 1. recommend TLP with guides to help the initial pmc, 2. accept incubating with tlp resource naming, but -incubating release naming, or 3. accept incubating requiring all incubator naming conventions, that might help the incubator simplify this decision. At this point, I personally guess that 1. might be the most sensible in terms of resource creation and management; it would simply require the group to vote for an initial chair/VP. If they are unsure of their group yet, perhaps one of the other mentors would offer to serve as their chair for the first six months, if they rather would do that? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:45, ant elder wrote: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Bernd Fondermann > wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 07:54, Eric Yang wrote: >>> Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify >>> the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC. One problem, Chukwa community >>> did not have a vote for PMC Chair because we are not sure what is the right >>> process for this. Meanwhile, I have been writing quarterly report like any >>> other Apache project, only recipient of the report is different. >>> >>> Chukwa releases have been voted by Chukwa community which is similar to >>> Hadoop releases, and managed incremental changes using patches and >>> committers. Code audit has been performed by the committers to ensure we >>> don't bring in license incompatible libraries into Chukwa. >>> >>> Owen O'Malley had trained us these procedures roughly two years ago, and we >>> have been executing the same process ever since. >> >> This translate for me into: >> Chukwa didn't have proper oversight by a PMC (a committee that is, not >> a single person) at Hadoop. >> Incubation would fix this using established processes. >> I think this is the right track, and the people involved, including >> the Hadoop PMC, ultimatively did the right thing. >> (Except for not simply growing the Hadoop PMC over time to include >> committers from every product.) >> >>> Chukwa has a community of exist user base of 35 people. It would be nice to >>> make Chukwa a special case to skip incubator nomenclature. This would ease >>> the migration path for the existing Chukwa community. >> >> Ok with me, at least as far as MLs or SVN are concerned. >> However, Chukwa must be aware that it is changing PMCs from Hadoop to >> Incubator. >> So different rules might apply, like marking release artifacts as >> "-incubating". >> Let's gather some more feedback on this. >> > > Most projects that come to incubate would likely prefer to go straight > to the TLP naming. Sure they'd prefer to. Terminating the Incubator would be worth its own thread, though. > The last time i recall this came up was here: > http://apache.markmail.org/message/ifinvq7wqmeoo5ix ... which is in the context of Subversion. Subversion is on the other end of incubating projects, coming from their own solid standalone ASF-like foundation. > IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa > website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a > TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them > decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) I see you blinking here, so I guess this is not just for putting up a strawman ;-) Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: > On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 07:54, Eric Yang wrote: >> Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify >> the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC. One problem, Chukwa community >> did not have a vote for PMC Chair because we are not sure what is the right >> process for this. Meanwhile, I have been writing quarterly report like any >> other Apache project, only recipient of the report is different. >> >> Chukwa releases have been voted by Chukwa community which is similar to >> Hadoop releases, and managed incremental changes using patches and >> committers. Code audit has been performed by the committers to ensure we >> don't bring in license incompatible libraries into Chukwa. >> >> Owen O'Malley had trained us these procedures roughly two years ago, and we >> have been executing the same process ever since. > > This translate for me into: > Chukwa didn't have proper oversight by a PMC (a committee that is, not > a single person) at Hadoop. > Incubation would fix this using established processes. > I think this is the right track, and the people involved, including > the Hadoop PMC, ultimatively did the right thing. > (Except for not simply growing the Hadoop PMC over time to include > committers from every product.) > >> Chukwa has a community of exist user base of 35 people. It would be nice to >> make Chukwa a special case to skip incubator nomenclature. This would ease >> the migration path for the existing Chukwa community. > > Ok with me, at least as far as MLs or SVN are concerned. > However, Chukwa must be aware that it is changing PMCs from Hadoop to > Incubator. > So different rules might apply, like marking release artifacts as > "-incubating". > Let's gather some more feedback on this. > Most projects that come to incubate would likely prefer to go straight to the TLP naming. The last time i recall this came up was here: http://apache.markmail.org/message/ifinvq7wqmeoo5ix IMHO we should insist on using the incubator naming for the Chukwa website/svn/MLs because I think Chukwa should just go directly to a TLP and if they have to use the incubator naming it may help them decide that the direct to TLP route really is better ;-) ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:23 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 19:29, Eric Yang wrote: >> Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 07:54, Eric Yang wrote: > Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify > the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC. One problem, Chukwa community > did not have a vote for PMC Chair because we are not sure what is the right > process for this. Meanwhile, I have been writing quarterly report like any > other Apache project, only recipient of the report is different. > > Chukwa releases have been voted by Chukwa community which is similar to > Hadoop releases, and managed incremental changes using patches and > committers. Code audit has been performed by the committers to ensure we > don't bring in license incompatible libraries into Chukwa. > > Owen O'Malley had trained us these procedures roughly two years ago, and we > have been executing the same process ever since. This translate for me into: Chukwa didn't have proper oversight by a PMC (a committee that is, not a single person) at Hadoop. Incubation would fix this using established processes. I think this is the right track, and the people involved, including the Hadoop PMC, ultimatively did the right thing. (Except for not simply growing the Hadoop PMC over time to include committers from every product.) > Chukwa has a community of exist user base of 35 people. It would be nice to > make Chukwa a special case to skip incubator nomenclature. This would ease > the migration path for the existing Chukwa community. Ok with me, at least as far as MLs or SVN are concerned. However, Chukwa must be aware that it is changing PMCs from Hadoop to Incubator. So different rules might apply, like marking release artifacts as "-incubating". Let's gather some more feedback on this. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
Besides DOAP file and the incubator nomenclature, I may need help identify the addition responsibilities for Apache PMC. One problem, Chukwa community did not have a vote for PMC Chair because we are not sure what is the right process for this. Meanwhile, I have been writing quarterly report like any other Apache project, only recipient of the report is different. Chukwa releases have been voted by Chukwa community which is similar to Hadoop releases, and managed incremental changes using patches and committers. Code audit has been performed by the committers to ensure we don't bring in license incompatible libraries into Chukwa. Owen O'Malley had trained us these procedures roughly two years ago, and we have been executing the same process ever since. Chukwa has a community of exist user base of 35 people. It would be nice to make Chukwa a special case to skip incubator nomenclature. This would ease the migration path for the existing Chukwa community. Regards, Eric On 6/22/10 7:11 AM, "Greg Reddin" wrote: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Bernd Fondermann > wrote: >> IIUC, the only issue right now is that the committers are hesistant to >> go TLP because they've never been on a PMC before. >> >>> The current proposal doesn't use the incubator naming for the mailing >>> lists and svn location, from past discussions here it should really be >>> using the incubator naming unless its a very special case. Is this a >>> special case? >> >> Good catch. I think the Incubator nomenclature should apply to Chukwa as >> well. > > It seems to me that it would save everyone some work if they went > straight with the TLP nomenclature. If they only need a short time in > the Incubator to learn how to be a PMC, then maybe the Incubator > nomenclature is not necessary and just creates more work for infra, > PMC, and users when they graduate. > > Greg > > - > 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] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:40 AM, Bernd Fondermann wrote: > IIUC, the only issue right now is that the committers are hesistant to > go TLP because they've never been on a PMC before. > >> The current proposal doesn't use the incubator naming for the mailing >> lists and svn location, from past discussions here it should really be >> using the incubator naming unless its a very special case. Is this a >> special case? > > Good catch. I think the Incubator nomenclature should apply to Chukwa as well. It seems to me that it would save everyone some work if they went straight with the TLP nomenclature. If they only need a short time in the Incubator to learn how to be a PMC, then maybe the Incubator nomenclature is not necessary and just creates more work for infra, PMC, and users when they graduate. Greg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 09:42, ant elder wrote: > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. > wrote: >> On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >>> >>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: >>> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited) impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just wanted to check, thanks guys! >>> >>> The problem is that none of the Chukwa PMC members have been on any >>> Apache PMCs before. My belief is that having training wheels for a bit >>> would be a good thing. >> >> And the podling's committee itself seeks the extra guidance as they become >> a self-managing committee, so the mentors all agreed with this proposal. >> If anything, it makes checking off the graduation matrix much simpler as >> they are already committers, we already have the IP vetting when the code >> came into Hadoop. We should obviously re-review the grants and trademark >> assignments during incubation. >> > > I'm not totally convinced by that reasoning, wouldn't it be simpler to > just go directly to TLP and have those listed here as mentors agree to > help out by being on the initial PMC? Maybe simpler, but better? I've only been involved in this process since yesterday or so, but I trust those who set out going the Incubator road. And the project doesn't loose anything with following it, even if it's a detour. The Incubator has more eyeballs than any other PMC and has tools to prepare projects to go TLP. We have far more projects eager to go TLP ASAP without properly preparing their PMCness than those openly saying we want to learn how to do it right first. > If it does incubate what would be delaying its graduation? Its already > got everything we list in the incubator docs - diverse committers, > done several releases etc. IIUC, the only issue right now is that the committers are hesistant to go TLP because they've never been on a PMC before. > The current proposal doesn't use the incubator naming for the mailing > lists and svn location, from past discussions here it should really be > using the incubator naming unless its a very special case. Is this a > special case? Good catch. I think the Incubator nomenclature should apply to Chukwa as well. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On 6/22/2010 2:42 AM, ant elder wrote: > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. > wrote: >> On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >>> >>> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: >>> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited) impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just wanted to check, thanks guys! >>> >>> The problem is that none of the Chukwa PMC members have been on any >>> Apache PMCs before. My belief is that having training wheels for a bit >>> would be a good thing. >> >> And the podling's committee itself seeks the extra guidance as they become >> a self-managing committee, so the mentors all agreed with this proposal. >> If anything, it makes checking off the graduation matrix much simpler as >> they are already committers, we already have the IP vetting when the code >> came into Hadoop. We should obviously re-review the grants and trademark >> assignments during incubation. >> > > I'm not totally convinced by that reasoning, wouldn't it be simpler to > just go directly to TLP and have those listed here as mentors agree to > help out by being on the initial PMC? > > If it does incubate what would be delaying its graduation? Its already > got everything we list in the incubator docs - diverse committers, > done several releases etc. > > The current proposal doesn't use the incubator naming for the mailing > lists and svn location, from past discussions here it should really be > using the incubator naming unless its a very special case. Is this a > special case? If that is the desire of the incubator, to refer this project to a TLP, I'm happy to serve on that pmc for the first 6 mos - 1 yr, whatever it takes for the project to become comfortable with all of the aspects. Note these committers were not hadoop pmc members, in fact it was this disjoint arrangement that pointed out the need to fork this subproject into its own entity, under the direction of its own community. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 8:09 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: >> >> On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: >> >>> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited) >>> impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the >>> Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just >>> wanted to check, thanks guys! >> >> The problem is that none of the Chukwa PMC members have been on any >> Apache PMCs before. My belief is that having training wheels for a bit >> would be a good thing. > > And the podling's committee itself seeks the extra guidance as they become > a self-managing committee, so the mentors all agreed with this proposal. > If anything, it makes checking off the graduation matrix much simpler as > they are already committers, we already have the IP vetting when the code > came into Hadoop. We should obviously re-review the grants and trademark > assignments during incubation. > I'm not totally convinced by that reasoning, wouldn't it be simpler to just go directly to TLP and have those listed here as mentors agree to help out by being on the initial PMC? If it does incubate what would be delaying its graduation? Its already got everything we list in the incubator docs - diverse committers, done several releases etc. The current proposal doesn't use the incubator naming for the mailing lists and svn location, from past discussions here it should really be using the incubator naming unless its a very special case. Is this a special case? ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 23:37, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > On 6/21/2010 12:29 PM, Eric Yang wrote: >> Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. >> >> The proposal is posted at: >> >> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal > > +1 +1 Added myself as a mentor. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 19:29, Eric Yang wrote: > Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. > > The proposal is posted at: > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal It's best practice to post the full proposal to the list, to have a snapshot archived. Chukwa Proposal Abstract Chukwa is a log collection and analysis framework base on Hadoop Map/Reduce. Proposal Chukwa will develop a open source data collection system for monitoring large distributed systems. Chukwa is built on top of the Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS) and Map/Reduce framework and inherits Hadoop’s scalability and robustness. Chukwa also includes a flexible and powerful toolkit for displaying, monitoring and analyzing results to make the best use of the collected data. Background Apache Hadoop, lacks a good procedure to monitor and troubleshoot large distributed systems. Chukwa was initially developed at Yahoo Inc headed by Mac Yang, Sunnyvale in 2008. Chukwa was designed as a reference implementation for monitoring large distributed system on top of Hadoop. Since 2009 major parts of the development comes from Internet community contribution. Chukwa is current a Hadoop subproject. Rationale The maintainers and developers of Chukwa are interested in joining the Apache Software Foundation top level project for several reasons: * Apache provide a great community for open source software development environment. * It might open the door for sharing ideas or cooperation with other Apache projects, such as Avro and Hadoop. * Chukwa would like to benefit from Apache's infrastructure. Initial Goals Though the bulk of Chukwa initial development is complete and the framework is running stable, there are still some large areas for future development. Some area we hope to focus on in Apache: * Improve Chukwa Demux map/reduce Job * Refine automated log analysis algorithms * Remove dependency on relational database for reporting Current Status 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 Chukwa is used in many organization which are interested in the advancement of the Chukwa development. Many of these have at least one developer that joined the Chukwa mailing list and so the mailing list is the most important communication platform. The Chukwa community encourages suggestions and contributions from any potential user and developer. Core Developers The initial set of Chukwa committers includes folks from the Hadoop communities. We have varying degrees of experience with Apache-style open source development. Alignment Chukwa is a framework for Apache Hadoop. This is why Apache Hadoop is the most important dependency for Chukwa. And Chukwa is also a particularly good fit for Apache due to integration potential with other projects specifically Avro and Log4j. Known Risks Orphaned products Most of the active developers would like to become Chukwa Committers or PMC Members and have long term interest to develop/maintain and use the code. Inexperience with Open Source Chukwa was started as an open source contribute project to Hadoop in 2008. Many of the committers have experience working on open source projects and there are also at least one developer which has experience as committer on other Apache projects. Homogenous Developers As mentioned above, the current list of committers includes developers from at least two different companies plus many independent volunteers. Reliance on Salaried Developers At this time, many of the code comes from different companies like RAD Lab. Because RAD Lab is a research facility, many of the work is done by students working on their diploma thesis. Relationships with Other Apache Products At this time, the only dependency to other Apache projects is Apache Hadoop. When dependency on relational database is removed, Avro will become the standard serialization framework for Chukwa. A Excessive Fascination with the Apache Brand The Chukwa project exist quite successful on their own and could continue on that path with no problems at all. We expect the Apache top level project brand could help to increase the visibility of the project and so maybe more developers could be interested in the project. Documentation * The existing project page could be found here: http://hadoop.apache.org/chukwa * The Chukwa Architecture: http://hadoop.apache.org/chukwa/docs/current/design.html * The Chukwa mailing list with archive: http://hadoop.apache.org/chukwa/mailing_lists.html Initial Source Source and Intellectual Property Submission Plan The complete Chukwa code is under Apache Software License 2. The complete codebase is already hosted in ASF Repository. External Dependencies The
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On 6/21/2010 12:29 PM, Eric Yang wrote: > Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. > > The proposal is posted at: > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Jun 21, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Eric Yang wrote: Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. The proposal is posted at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On 6/21/10 11:29 AM, Eric Yang wrote: Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. The proposal is posted at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal +1 (non-binding). Cheers, -- Leif - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
+1 Regards, Alan On Jun 21, 2010, at 10:29 AM, Eric Yang wrote: > Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. > > The proposal is posted at: > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal > > Thanks > > Regards, > Eric > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
Hey Owen, +1, sounds good. Cheers, Chris On 6/21/10 11:31 AM, "Owen O'Malley" wrote: On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited) > impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the > Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just > wanted to check, thanks guys! The problem is that none of the Chukwa PMC members have been on any Apache PMCs before. My belief is that having training wheels for a bit would be a good thing. -- Owen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On 6/21/2010 1:31 PM, Owen O'Malley wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > >> Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited) >> impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the >> Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just >> wanted to check, thanks guys! > > The problem is that none of the Chukwa PMC members have been on any > Apache PMCs before. My belief is that having training wheels for a bit > would be a good thing. And the podling's committee itself seeks the extra guidance as they become a self-managing committee, so the mentors all agreed with this proposal. If anything, it makes checking off the graduation matrix much simpler as they are already committers, we already have the IP vetting when the code came into Hadoop. We should obviously re-review the grants and trademark assignments during incubation. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited) impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just wanted to check, thanks guys! The problem is that none of the Chukwa PMC members have been on any Apache PMCs before. My belief is that having training wheels for a bit would be a good thing. -- Owen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
Hey Guys, Chukwa has been around for a while now and from my (albeit limited) impression, pretty successful. What's the rationale for going the Incubator route rather than putting up a Board TLP resolution? Just wanted to check, thanks guys! Cheers, Chris On 6/21/10 10:29 AM, "Eric Yang" wrote: Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. The proposal is posted at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal Thanks Regards, Eric ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++
[VOTE] Move Chukwa to incubator
Please vote as to whether you think Chukwa should move to Apache incubator. The proposal is posted at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ChukwaProposal Thanks Regards, Eric
