Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

There doesn’t seem to be any objection in changing this, so consider it changed.

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

Request to add me as a IPMC Member

[Sunil Govindan]

Hello,

I am an Apache member and would like to volunteer & participate in a couple
of incubator projects as a mentor. Kindly add me as an IPMC member. Thank
you.

Sunil Govindan

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Craig Russell]

+1 from me.

The IPMC has greater ability to correct any PPMC "mistakes" at graduation than 
the board does in case of an issue with a PMC appointment.

Craig

> On Oct 15, 2022, at 21:46, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>> While this is a legitimate concern, as far as I know the Board and the
>> IPMC have not once exercised the right of veto
> 
> It has happened, but we’re talking only a few times, so it is still a very 
> rare exception.
> 
> Podlings have more frequently been queried about their PMC makeup on 
> graduation and in several cases asked to make changes, so I think we can 
> cover any issues at that point.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 

Craig L Russell
c...@apache.org


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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[david zollo]

+1
It sounds good to me.



Best Regards

---
Apache DolphinScheduler PMC Chair & Apache SeaTunnel PPMC
David
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/davidzollo
Twitter: @WorkflowEasy 
---


On Sun, Oct 16, 2022 at 12:46 PM Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > While this is a legitimate concern, as far as I know the Board and the
> > IPMC have not once exercised the right of veto
>
> It has happened, but we’re talking only a few times, so it is still a very
> rare exception.
>
> Podlings have more frequently been queried about their PMC makeup on
> graduation and in several cases asked to make changes, so I think we can
> cover any issues at that point.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> While this is a legitimate concern, as far as I know the Board and the
> IPMC have not once exercised the right of veto

It has happened, but we’re talking only a few times, so it is still a very rare 
exception.

Podlings have more frequently been queried about their PMC makeup on graduation 
and in several cases asked to make changes, so I think we can cover any issues 
at that point.

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Julian Hyde]

> If we now exercise our means to object [to] a nomination after it’s executed,
> we have this odd unpleasant situation of the person knowing what happened.

While this is a legitimate concern, as far as I know the Board and the
IPMC have not once exercised the right of veto, for hundreds if not
thousands of PMC and PPMC appointments. So, let's optimize the common
code path (approval without objection) over the rare path (veto from
the Board/IPMC).

On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 9:40 AM Christofer Dutz
 wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Well, I guess one of the reasons for the 72 hour was, that others can express 
> their doubts before the person is invited.
> If we now exercise our means to object a nomination after it’s executed, we 
> have this odd unpleasant situation of the person knowing what happened.
>
> But I guess we could try it and put it back in place if we see things go 
> south.
>
> Chris
>
>
> From: Justin Mclean 
> Date: Friday, 14. October 2022 at 17:39
> To: general@incubator.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.
> Hi,
>
> > I’m a bit worried that in contrast to PMCs PPMCs are usually not quite 
> > familiar with how things work at Apache.
> > Would we still have an option to intervene, if for example one PPMC bunch 
> > adds people from the same company, for example?
>
> I have a slight concern there as well, but this would very rarely occur. The 
> IPMC can remove people from the PPMC if they were inappropriately added.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi,

Well, I guess one of the reasons for the 72 hour was, that others can express 
their doubts before the person is invited.
If we now exercise our means to object a nomination after it’s executed, we 
have this odd unpleasant situation of the person knowing what happened.

But I guess we could try it and put it back in place if we see things go south.

Chris


From: Justin Mclean 
Date: Friday, 14. October 2022 at 17:39
To: general@incubator.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.
Hi,

> I’m a bit worried that in contrast to PMCs PPMCs are usually not quite 
> familiar with how things work at Apache.
> Would we still have an option to intervene, if for example one PPMC bunch 
> adds people from the same company, for example?

I have a slight concern there as well, but this would very rarely occur. The 
IPMC can remove people from the PPMC if they were inappropriately added.

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

Le ven. 14 oct. 2022 à 15:24, Christofer Dutz
 a écrit :
> ...Would we still have an option to intervene, if for example one PPMC bunch 
> adds people from the same company, for example?

That should be reviewed at graduation time.

A PPMC has no formal power, so cannot cause any harm to the Foundation
- but yes we need to be careful when graduation happens.

-Bertrand

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> I’m a bit worried that in contrast to PMCs PPMCs are usually not quite 
> familiar with how things work at Apache.
> Would we still have an option to intervene, if for example one PPMC bunch 
> adds people from the same company, for example?

I have a slight concern there as well, but this would very rarely occur. The 
IPMC can remove people from the PPMC if they were inappropriately added.

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Out of curiosity: is there a specific motivation for the change for the
> incubator - or just to keep in line with 'regular' PMC path?

Mostly to keep it in line with what PMC’s do, it also simplifies the process.

> Also, is there a relevant thread somewhere from Board discussion, as to the 
> reason
> for the change for PMC wait period?

There been a few conversations on the board list, the last (I believe) was this 
one. [1]

Kind Regards,
Justin

1. https://lists.apache.org/thread/cwwtw5hpsdr1953k2g2dxhr9jwnwvjnt
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

+1

It sounds good to me.

Regards
JB

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 8:24 AM Willem Jiang  wrote:
>
> +1 for removing the 72-hour wait time to add a PPMC member.
>
> Willem Jiang
>
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:45 AM Justin Mclean  
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member to 
> > a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC 
> > members to a podling.
> >
> > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just require 
> > a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Justin
> > -
> > 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: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Christofer Dutz]

+/-0 (binding)

I’m a bit worried that in contrast to PMCs PPMCs are usually not quite familiar 
with how things work at Apache.
Would we still have an option to intervene, if for example one PPMC bunch adds 
people from the same company, for example?

Chris

From: Goson zhang 
Date: Friday, 14. October 2022 at 02:41
To: general@incubator.apache.org 
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.
+1 non-binding

peacewong  于2022年10月14日周五 15:05写道：

>   +1(non binding) to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours of waiting.
>
> Best Regards!
>
>
>
> Willem Jiang  于2022年10月14日周五 14:24写道：
>
> > +1 for removing the 72-hour wait time to add a PPMC member.
> >
> > Willem Jiang
> >
> > Twitter: willemjiang
> > Weibo: 姜宁willem
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:45 AM Justin Mclean 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member
> > to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC
> > members to a podling.
> > >
> > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just
> > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Justin
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Goson zhang]

+1 non-binding

peacewong  于2022年10月14日周五 15:05写道：

>   +1(non binding) to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours of waiting.
>
> Best Regards!
>
>
>
> Willem Jiang  于2022年10月14日周五 14:24写道：
>
> > +1 for removing the 72-hour wait time to add a PPMC member.
> >
> > Willem Jiang
> >
> > Twitter: willemjiang
> > Weibo: 姜宁willem
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:45 AM Justin Mclean 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member
> > to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC
> > members to a podling.
> > >
> > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just
> > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Justin
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[peacewong]

  +1(non binding) to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours of waiting.

Best Regards!



Willem Jiang  于2022年10月14日周五 14:24写道：

> +1 for removing the 72-hour wait time to add a PPMC member.
>
> Willem Jiang
>
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:45 AM Justin Mclean 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member
> to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC
> members to a podling.
> >
> > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just
> require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Justin
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Willem Jiang]

+1 for removing the 72-hour wait time to add a PPMC member.

Willem Jiang

Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:45 AM Justin Mclean  wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member to a 
> top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC members 
> to a podling.
>
> Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just require a 
> PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Charles Zhang]

  +1(non binding) to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours of waiting.

Best wishes,
Charles Zhang
from Apache InLong


alin.jerpe...@sony.com  于2022年10月14日周五 12:08写道：

> +1 non-binding
>
> Best Regards
> Alin Jerpelea
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cas...@apache.org 
> Sent: den 14 oktober 2022 04:39
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.
>
> +1 non-binding
>
> Best Regards!
> Chen Xia
>
>
> Yu Xiao  于2022年10月14日周五 10:33写道：
> >
> > + 1 ，about add PPMC~
> >
> > Best wishes!
> >
> > Yu Xiao
> > Apache ShenYu
> >
> > Austin Bennett  于2022年10月14日周五 10:24写道：
> > >
> > > +1 (non binding)
> > >
> > > Out of curiosity: is there a specific motivation for the change for
> > > the incubator - or just to keep in line with 'regular' PMC path?
> > > Also, is there a relevant thread somewhere from Board discussion, as
> > > to the reason for the change for PMC wait period?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:52 PM Josh Fischer 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non binding)
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sheng Wu
> > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > >
> > > > > Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher
> > > > > > 
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean <
> > > > jus...@classsoftware.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add
> > > > > > > > a PMC
> > > > > member to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting
> > > > > time to
> > > > add
> > > > > PPMC members to a podling.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time
> > > > > > > > and just
> > > > > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has
> > > > > > > been
> > > > added.
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > > > > Justin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > --
> > > > ---
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best wishes！
> > > > > > CalvinKirs
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > --- 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
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > Sent from A Mobile Device
> > > >
> >
> > -
> > 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: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[alin.jerpe...@sony.com]

+1 non-binding

Best Regards
Alin Jerpelea

-Original Message-
From: cas...@apache.org  
Sent: den 14 oktober 2022 04:39
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

+1 non-binding

Best Regards!
Chen Xia


Yu Xiao  于2022年10月14日周五 10:33写道：
>
> + 1 ，about add PPMC~
>
> Best wishes!
>
> Yu Xiao
> Apache ShenYu
>
> Austin Bennett  于2022年10月14日周五 10:24写道：
> >
> > +1 (non binding)
> >
> > Out of curiosity: is there a specific motivation for the change for 
> > the incubator - or just to keep in line with 'regular' PMC path?  
> > Also, is there a relevant thread somewhere from Board discussion, as 
> > to the reason for the change for PMC wait period?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:52 PM Josh Fischer  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non binding)
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sheng Wu 
> > > 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.
> > > >
> > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > >
> > > > Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher 
> > > > > 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean <
> > > jus...@classsoftware.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add 
> > > > > > > a PMC
> > > > member to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting 
> > > > time to
> > > add
> > > > PPMC members to a podling.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time 
> > > > > > > and just
> > > > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has 
> > > > > > been
> > > added.
> > > > > +1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > > > Justin
> > > > > > >
> > > --
> > > ---
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best wishes！
> > > > > CalvinKirs
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > --- 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
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > Sent from A Mobile Device
> > >
>
> -
> 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: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Nathan Hartman]

On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 6:45 PM Justin Mclean  wrote:
> The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member to a 
> top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC members 
> to a podling.
>
> Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just require a 
> PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?

Seems sensible to me.

+1 to remove the 72-hour wait time and keep the NOTICE requirement.

Cheers,
Nathan

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[William Guo]

+1

remove 72 hours waiting.

Thanks,
William

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 10:40 AM cas...@apache.org 
wrote:

> +1 non-binding
>
> Best Regards!
> Chen Xia
>
>
> Yu Xiao  于2022年10月14日周五 10:33写道：
> >
> > + 1 ，about add PPMC~
> >
> > Best wishes!
> >
> > Yu Xiao
> > Apache ShenYu
> >
> > Austin Bennett  于2022年10月14日周五 10:24写道：
> > >
> > > +1 (non binding)
> > >
> > > Out of curiosity: is there a specific motivation for the change for the
> > > incubator - or just to keep in line with 'regular' PMC path?  Also, is
> > > there a relevant thread somewhere from Board discussion, as to the
> reason
> > > for the change for PMC wait period?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:52 PM Josh Fischer 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 (non binding)
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sheng Wu 
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > >
> > > > > Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher <
> wave4d...@comcast.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean <
> > > > jus...@classsoftware.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a
> PMC
> > > > > member to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting
> time to
> > > > add
> > > > > PPMC members to a podling.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time
> and just
> > > > > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been
> > > > added.
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > > > > Justin
> > > > > > > >
> > > > -
> > > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best wishes！
> > > > > > CalvinKirs
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> -
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > Sent from A Mobile Device
> > > >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[cas...@apache.org]

+1 non-binding

Best Regards!
Chen Xia


Yu Xiao  于2022年10月14日周五 10:33写道：
>
> + 1 ，about add PPMC~
>
> Best wishes!
>
> Yu Xiao
> Apache ShenYu
>
> Austin Bennett  于2022年10月14日周五 10:24写道：
> >
> > +1 (non binding)
> >
> > Out of curiosity: is there a specific motivation for the change for the
> > incubator - or just to keep in line with 'regular' PMC path?  Also, is
> > there a relevant thread somewhere from Board discussion, as to the reason
> > for the change for PMC wait period?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:52 PM Josh Fischer  wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non binding)
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sheng Wu 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.
> > > >
> > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > >
> > > > Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean <
> > > jus...@classsoftware.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC
> > > > member to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to
> > > add
> > > > PPMC members to a podling.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just
> > > > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been
> > > added.
> > > > > +1
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > > > Justin
> > > > > > >
> > > -
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best wishes！
> > > > > CalvinKirs
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > Sent from A Mobile Device
> > >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Yu Xiao]

+ 1 ，about add PPMC~

Best wishes!

Yu Xiao
Apache ShenYu

Austin Bennett  于2022年10月14日周五 10:24写道：
>
> +1 (non binding)
>
> Out of curiosity: is there a specific motivation for the change for the
> incubator - or just to keep in line with 'regular' PMC path?  Also, is
> there a relevant thread somewhere from Board discussion, as to the reason
> for the change for PMC wait period?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:52 PM Josh Fischer  wrote:
>
> > +1 (non binding)
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sheng Wu 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.
> > >
> > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > >
> > > Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean <
> > jus...@classsoftware.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC
> > > member to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to
> > add
> > > PPMC members to a podling.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just
> > > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > > > >
> > > > > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been
> > added.
> > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > > Justin
> > > > > >
> > -
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best wishes！
> > > > CalvinKirs
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > 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
> > >
> > > --
> > Sent from A Mobile Device
> >

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Austin Bennett]

+1 (non binding)

Out of curiosity: is there a specific motivation for the change for the
incubator - or just to keep in line with 'regular' PMC path?  Also, is
there a relevant thread somewhere from Board discussion, as to the reason
for the change for PMC wait period?



On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:52 PM Josh Fischer  wrote:

> +1 (non binding)
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sheng Wu 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.
> >
> > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > Twitter, wusheng1108
> >
> > Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean <
> jus...@classsoftware.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC
> > member to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to
> add
> > PPMC members to a podling.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just
> > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > > >
> > > > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been
> added.
> > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > Justin
> > > > >
> -
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best wishes！
> > > CalvinKirs
> > >
> > > -
> > > 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
> >
> > --
> Sent from A Mobile Device
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[tison]

+1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours requirement.

One reminder here is that we should update the description on
https://whimsy.apache.org/ when adding new members also. Currently, it
writes:

> To add existing committers to the PPMC, please cancel this dialog. Select
the committer from the list and use the Modify button.

That can be read as neither NOTICE nor 72 hours requirement is needed.

Best,
tison.


Josh Fischer  于2022年10月14日周五 09:52写道：

> +1 (non binding)
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sheng Wu 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.
> >
> > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > Twitter, wusheng1108
> >
> > Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean <
> jus...@classsoftware.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC
> > member to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to
> add
> > PPMC members to a podling.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just
> > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > > >
> > > > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been
> added.
> > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > > Justin
> > > > >
> -
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best wishes！
> > > CalvinKirs
> > >
> > > -
> > > 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
> >
> > --
> Sent from A Mobile Device
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Josh Fischer]

+1 (non binding)

On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 7:51 PM Sheng Wu  wrote:

> +1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.
>
> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> Twitter, wusheng1108
>
> Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC
> member to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add
> PPMC members to a podling.
> > > >
> > > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just
> require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> > >
> > > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been added.
> > +1
> > > >
> > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > Justin
> > > > -
> > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best wishes！
> > CalvinKirs
> >
> > -
> > 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
>
> --
Sent from A Mobile Device

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Sheng Wu]

+1 to keep the NOTICE and remove 72 hours waiting.

Sheng Wu 吴晟
Twitter, wusheng1108

Calvin Kirs  于2022年10月14日周五 08:37写道：
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean  
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member 
> > > to a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC 
> > > members to a podling.
> > >
> > > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just 
> > > require a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
> >
> > Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been added.
> +1
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > > Justin
> > > -
> > > 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
> >
>
>
> --
> Best wishes！
> CalvinKirs
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Calvin Kirs]

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member to 
> > a top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC 
> > members to a podling.
> >
> > Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just require 
> > a PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?
>
> Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been added.
+1
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> > Justin
> > -
> > 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
>


-- 
Best wishes！
CalvinKirs

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 13, 2022, at 3:46 PM, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member to a 
> top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC members 
> to a podling. 
> 
> Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just require a 
> PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?

Let’s just require that they notify that a PPMC member has been added.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> -
> 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

[DISCUSS] Remove 72 hour waiting time to add PPMC members.

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

The board recently changed the 72-hour waiting time to add a PMC member to a 
top level project. We have the same 72-hour waiting time to add PPMC members to 
a podling. 

Do we want to consider removing this 72-hour waiting time and just require a 
PMC to notify the IPMC that they want to add someone?

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

[GitHub] [incubator] dave2wave merged pull request #97: add xlst and converted files

[GitBox]

dave2wave merged pull request #97:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/97


   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org



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

[GitHub] [incubator] dave2wave merged pull request #97: add xlst and converted files

[GitBox]

dave2wave merged pull request #97:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/97


   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org



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

[jira] [Created] (INCUBATOR-264) Add a Sponsor Section to the Proposal Guide

[Dave Fisher (Jira)]

Dave Fisher created INCUBATOR-264:
-

 Summary: Add a Sponsor Section to the Proposal Guide
 Key: INCUBATOR-264
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-264
 Project: Incubator
  Issue Type: Task
Reporter: Dave Fisher


I propose a section called Sponsor be added to 
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html

This section should describe the usual case of the Incubator as sponsor but 
then refer to what happens if a TLP is sponsor. If a TLP then often, but not 
always the podling graduates as a subproject.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

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

[GitHub] [incubator] dave2wave merged pull request #90: Add new javascript for Apachecon event logos and links

[GitBox]

dave2wave merged pull request #90:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/90


   



This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org



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

[GitHub] [incubator] dave2wave opened a new pull request #90: Add new javascript for Apachecon event logos and links

[GitBox]

dave2wave opened a new pull request #90:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/90


   New Apachecon Event Logos



This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org



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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #62: Add distribution guidelines

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #62:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/62


   



This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org



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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #62: Add distribution guidelines

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #62:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/62


   



This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org



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

RE: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Chen, Ciyong]

Thanks Leonard for the confirmation, I will update the related files based on 
the consensus. 

Regards,
-Ciyong

-Original Message-
From: Leonard Lausen  
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 2:24 AM
To: d...@mxnet.incubator.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: 
[MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party 
work guidance

Hi Ciyong,

the consensus passed, so we should proceed according to the consensus.

Thank you
Leonard

On Tue, 2020-06-23 at 09:04 +, Chen, Ciyong wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm wondering if there's any further concerns for this "72 hours lazy 
> consensus"?
> Shall we continue with the option of "I believe PPMC would prefer to 
> put the ASF header on top of the file (ie. 2 headers)"
> 
> Thanks,
> -Ciyong
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Leonard Lausen 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 7:06 AM
> To: d...@mxnet.incubator.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code 
> [WAS]
> Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of 
> third- party work guidance
> 
> Thank you everyone for your valuable advice.
> 
> > so if you did want to avoid including the license in your releases 
> > you would either need to rely on the file as an external dependency 
> > or completely reimplement the functionality not deriving it from 
> > this file.
> 
> Including the BSD-3 style license in releases wouldn't be a problem, 
> as it's compatible with Apache License 2. As there are substantial 
> changes, I believe PPMC would prefer to put the ASF header on top of 
> the file (ie. 2 headers) [72 hours lazy consensus if there are no 
> concerns]. We still need to declare all the numpy einsum derived files 
> in the LICENSE and fix the inconsistency that ASF header was removed 
> in src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_op-inl.h but remains in 
> src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> 
> Related: As PPMC strives to provide partial API compatibility with 
> NumPy in MXNet 2 based on the NumPy Array Function Protocol [1], could 
> you clarify if these MXNet operators should be considered derived from 
> NumPy (thus warranting the BSD-3 style license headers) solely based 
> on integrating with the NumPy API and providing compatible operators? 
> Or only (as in the einsum case above), if the actual implementation 
> was derived from NumPy's implementation. I believe it's the latter, but 
> please clarify if that's wrong.
> 
> Should ASF update the "Do not add the standard Apache License header 
> to the top of third-party source files." at [2]? This sentence was the 
> motivation to open this discussion thread, and according to the 
> current consensus here is "incomplete". How about adding an "unless 
> the third-party source file contains major modifications by ASF" to clarify?
> 
> Thank you
> Leonard
> 
> [1]: https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0018-array-function-protocol.html
> [2]: https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
> 
> On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 09:36 -0400, John D. Ament wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 2:19 PM Bob Paulin  wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's 
> > > appropriate to add Apache License Headers to Third Party code 
> > > across projects.  Here is Justin's email that request the Apache 
> > > Headers removed [1]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > - file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to 
> > > incorrectly have an ASF header on it 
> > > 6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> > > 
> > > 
> > > We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the 
> > > project and most correct for the situation.
> > > 
> > > Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like 
> > > the cases where dual headers are appropriate is when there are 
> > > Major Modifications.  In the case of
> > > 
> > > np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> > > 
> > > The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the 
> > > implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then 
> > > the community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the 
> > > changes over that is always based on Numpy so it may be more 
> > > appropriate to just keep the Numpy license.
> > > 
> > > Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer 
> > > resembles the Numpy implementation (Maj

Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> the consensus passed, so we should proceed according to the consensus.


It’s unclear to me what you think of as consensus here, can you care to specify 
what the project is going to do?

Justin



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

Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Leonard Lausen]

Hi Ciyong,

the consensus passed, so we should proceed according to the consensus.

Thank you
Leonard

On Tue, 2020-06-23 at 09:04 +, Chen, Ciyong wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm wondering if there's any further concerns for this "72 hours lazy
> consensus"?
> Shall we continue with the option of "I believe PPMC would prefer to put the
> ASF header on top of the file (ie. 2 headers)"
> 
> Thanks,
> -Ciyong
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Leonard Lausen 
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 7:06 AM
> To: d...@mxnet.incubator.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS]
> Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-
> party work guidance
> 
> Thank you everyone for your valuable advice.
> 
> > so if you did want to avoid including the license in your releases you
> > would either need to rely on the file as an external dependency or
> > completely reimplement the functionality not deriving it from this
> > file.
> 
> Including the BSD-3 style license in releases wouldn't be a problem, as it's
> compatible with Apache License 2. As there are substantial changes, I believe
> PPMC would prefer to put the ASF header on top of the file (ie. 2 headers) [72
> hours lazy consensus if there are no concerns]. We still need to declare all
> the numpy einsum derived files in the LICENSE and fix the inconsistency that
> ASF header was removed in src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_op-inl.h but remains in
> src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> 
> Related: As PPMC strives to provide partial API compatibility with NumPy in
> MXNet 2 based on the NumPy Array Function Protocol [1], could you clarify if
> these MXNet operators should be considered derived from NumPy (thus warranting
> the BSD-3 style license headers) solely based on integrating with the NumPy
> API and providing compatible operators? Or only (as in the einsum case above),
> if the actual implementation was derived from NumPy's implementation. I
> believe it's the latter, but please clarify if that's wrong.
> 
> Should ASF update the "Do not add the standard Apache License header to the
> top of third-party source files." at [2]? This sentence was the motivation to
> open this discussion thread, and according to the current consensus here is
> "incomplete". How about adding an "unless the third-party source file contains
> major modifications by ASF" to clarify?
> 
> Thank you
> Leonard
> 
> [1]: https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0018-array-function-protocol.html
> [2]: https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
> 
> On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 09:36 -0400, John D. Ament wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 2:19 PM Bob Paulin  wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's
> > > appropriate to add Apache License Headers to Third Party code across
> > > projects.  Here is Justin's email that request the Apache Headers
> > > removed [1]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > - file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to incorrectly
> > > have an ASF header on it 
> > > 6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> > > 
> > > 
> > > We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the
> > > project and most correct for the situation.
> > > 
> > > Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like
> > > the cases where dual headers are appropriate is when there are Major
> > > Modifications.  In the case of
> > > 
> > > np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> > > 
> > > The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the
> > > implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then
> > > the community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the changes
> > > over that is always based on Numpy so it may be more appropriate to
> > > just keep the Numpy license.
> > > 
> > > Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer
> > > resembles the Numpy implementation (Major Modification)?  If so it
> > > may be better to keep the Apache Header as going forward the file
> > > will represent the work of the MXNet community not that of Numpy.
> > > 
> > 
> > Keeping the (what appears to be) BSD-3 style license is perfectly fine
> > and is in fact what the NumPy license says to do.  We would only
> > change the license from the NumPy license to ALv2 if an SGA or ICLA is
> > received from all contribut

RE: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Chen, Ciyong]

Hi all,

I'm wondering if there's any further concerns for this "72 hours lazy 
consensus"?
Shall we continue with the option of "I believe PPMC would prefer to put the 
ASF header on top of the file (ie. 2 headers)"

Thanks,
-Ciyong

-Original Message-
From: Leonard Lausen  
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2020 7:06 AM
To: d...@mxnet.incubator.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: 
[MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party 
work guidance

Thank you everyone for your valuable advice.

> so if you did want to avoid including the license in your releases you 
> would either need to rely on the file as an external dependency or 
> completely reimplement the functionality not deriving it from this 
> file.

Including the BSD-3 style license in releases wouldn't be a problem, as it's 
compatible with Apache License 2. As there are substantial changes, I believe 
PPMC would prefer to put the ASF header on top of the file (ie. 2 headers) [72 
hours lazy consensus if there are no concerns]. We still need to declare all 
the numpy einsum derived files in the LICENSE and fix the inconsistency that 
ASF header was removed in src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_op-inl.h but remains in 
src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h

Related: As PPMC strives to provide partial API compatibility with NumPy in 
MXNet 2 based on the NumPy Array Function Protocol [1], could you clarify if 
these MXNet operators should be considered derived from NumPy (thus warranting 
the BSD-3 style license headers) solely based on integrating with the NumPy API 
and providing compatible operators? Or only (as in the einsum case above), if 
the actual implementation was derived from NumPy's implementation. I believe 
it's the latter, but please clarify if that's wrong.

Should ASF update the "Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top 
of third-party source files." at [2]? This sentence was the motivation to open 
this discussion thread, and according to the current consensus here is 
"incomplete". How about adding an "unless the third-party source file contains 
major modifications by ASF" to clarify?

Thank you
Leonard

[1]: https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0018-array-function-protocol.html
[2]: https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party

On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 09:36 -0400, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 2:19 PM Bob Paulin  wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's 
> > appropriate to add Apache License Headers to Third Party code across 
> > projects.  Here is Justin's email that request the Apache Headers 
> > removed [1]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > - file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to incorrectly 
> > have an ASF header on it 
> > 6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> > 
> > 
> > We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the 
> > project and most correct for the situation.
> > 
> > Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like 
> > the cases where dual headers are appropriate is when there are Major 
> > Modifications.  In the case of
> > 
> > np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> > 
> > The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the 
> > implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then 
> > the community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the changes 
> > over that is always based on Numpy so it may be more appropriate to 
> > just keep the Numpy license.
> > 
> > Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer 
> > resembles the Numpy implementation (Major Modification)?  If so it 
> > may be better to keep the Apache Header as going forward the file 
> > will represent the work of the MXNet community not that of Numpy.
> > 
> 
> Keeping the (what appears to be) BSD-3 style license is perfectly fine 
> and is in fact what the NumPy license says to do.  We would only 
> change the license from the NumPy license to ALv2 if an SGA or ICLA is 
> received from all contributors historically on this file.  No matter 
> how drastic of modifications the MxNet community makes to it, it would 
> always be NumPy licensed; so if you did want to avoid including the 
> license in your releases you would either need to rely on the file as 
> an external dependency or completely reimplement the functionality not 
> deriving it from this file.  Whether or not the MxNet community 
> imports upstream changes or not is up to them, but either way you have a 
> derived work here.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> > Hopefully the above helps clarify my pers

Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Justin Mclean]

HI,

> In addition, Justin stated that converting the code from one program language 
> to another one should **NOT** be considered as a major modification.

INAL but my understanding is that translation from one language to another is 
considered a fairly trivial task and may not be novel enough for a copyright to 
apply and it would not considered an original work.

> So it seems more appropriate to remove the ASF header and just keep the Numpy 
> license header and claim it at the top level LICENSE, or do we need to vote 
> on the two options as Bob stated below, thanks!

I think the safest think to do would be to leave the original header on and 
remove the ASF one.Version control will show what lines have been modified if 
anyone is stressed in the history.

Thanks,
Justin

RE: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Chen, Ciyong]

Thanks a lot for your valuable input Bob, John, Justin, Leonard.

As it’s still not finalized on how to handle such dual license issue from the 
discussion.
In addition, Justin stated that converting the code from one program language 
to another one should **NOT** be considered as a major modification.
And based on the statement #3 and #4 from 
https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
> 3.Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top of third-party 
> source files.
> 4.Minor modifications/additions to third-party source files should typically 
> be licensed under the same terms as the rest of the rest of the third-party 
> source for convenience.

So it seems more appropriate to remove the ASF header and just keep the Numpy 
license header and claim it at the top level LICENSE, or do we need to vote on 
the two options as Bob stated below, thanks!
>1) Numpy License Headers Only
> 2) Apache Header with Numpy License Header (keep the license header as is now)

Best Regards,
-Ciyong

From: Bob Paulin 
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 11:38 PM
To: d...@mxnet.incubator.apache.org; Chen, Ciyong ; 
lau...@apache.org; d...@mxnet.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: 
[MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party 
work guidance


Hi,

I should be more clear.  The 2 options in the case below is

1) Numpy License Headers Only

2) Apache Header with Numpy License Header

Re-reading my original reply does sound like I'm saying the Numpy license 
should be removed in the case for the Apache License Headers from the file.  
This was not my intent.  John states it more clearly in his reply that removal 
of the Numpy License requires additional steps.



- Bob
On 6/15/2020 3:05 AM, Chen, Ciyong wrote:

Hi Bob, Leonard,



Thanks for the elaboration/guideline on the dual license issue.

May I have the conclusion as below based on Bob’s direction/suggestion:





  *   If there’s no any different opinion or objection,  keep either origin 
Numpy license or ASF license but not dual, which depends on how MXNet’s source 
file evolves when the origin Numpy files changes? And the PPMC has all the 
authority to change the file like removing the additional license if needed.



Please correct me if I mis-understand anything, and help to determine the best 
appropriate way to handle such case. Thanks!



Best Regards,

-Ciyong



From: Bob Paulin <mailto:b...@bobpaulin.com>

Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2020 2:20 AM

To: lau...@apache.org<mailto:lau...@apache.org>; 
d...@mxnet.apache.org<mailto:d...@mxnet.apache.org>; 
general@incubator.apache.org<mailto:general@incubator.apache.org>

Subject: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: 
[MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party 
work guidance





Hi,



I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's appropriate to add 
Apache License Headers to Third Party code across projects.  Here is Justin's 
email that request the Apache Headers removed [1]







- file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to incorrectly have an 
ASF header on it







6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h







We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the project and 
most correct for the situation.



Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like the cases 
where dual headers are appropriate is when there are Major Modifications.  In 
the case of



np_einsum_path_op-inl.h



The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the 
implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then the 
community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the changes over that is 
always based on Numpy so it may be more appropriate to just keep the Numpy 
license.



Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer resembles the 
Numpy implementation (Major Modification)?  If so it may be better to keep the 
Apache Header as going forward the file will represent the work of the MXNet 
community not that of Numpy.



Hopefully the above helps clarify my perspective on how to determine case by 
case.  I don't see the dual license state as the simpler case in all 
situations.  I don't believe you would have to get the original committer to 
relicense the file to you in order to remove the additional license.  I believe 
the PPMC has all the authority it needs to change the file.  I'd be interested 
to hear if this is a position that the rest of the Mentors/Incubator agree 
with.  I know Hen has been involved in some of the conversations in support of 
dual licenses.  Has this ever required escalation to an actual Lawyer in Legal? 
 Or have these determinations been low enough risk that we are comfortable with 
our PMC making best effort decisions based on the ASF guidelines?

Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Leonard Lausen]

Thank you everyone for your valuable advice.

> so if you did want to avoid including the license in your
> releases you would either need to rely on the file as an external
> dependency or completely reimplement the functionality not deriving it from
> this file.

Including the BSD-3 style license in releases wouldn't be a problem, as it's
compatible with Apache License 2. As there are substantial changes, I believe
PPMC would prefer to put the ASF header on top of the file (ie. 2 headers) [72
hours lazy consensus if there are no concerns]. We still need to declare all the
numpy einsum derived files in the LICENSE and fix the inconsistency that ASF
header was removed in src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_op-inl.h but remains in
src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h

Related: As PPMC strives to provide partial API compatibility with NumPy in
MXNet 2 based on the NumPy Array Function Protocol [1], could you clarify if
these MXNet operators should be considered derived from NumPy (thus warranting
the BSD-3 style license headers) solely based on integrating with the NumPy API
and providing compatible operators? Or only (as in the einsum case above), if
the actual implementation was derived from NumPy's implementation. I believe
it's the latter, but please clarify if that's wrong.

Should ASF update the "Do not add the standard Apache License header to the top
of third-party source files." at [2]? This sentence was the motivation to open
this discussion thread, and according to the current consensus here is
"incomplete". How about adding an "unless the third-party source file contains
major modifications by ASF" to clarify?

Thank you
Leonard

[1]: https://numpy.org/neps/nep-0018-array-function-protocol.html
[2]: https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party

On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 09:36 -0400, John D. Ament wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 2:19 PM Bob Paulin  wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's appropriate to
> > add Apache License Headers to Third Party code across projects.  Here is
> > Justin's email that request the Apache Headers removed [1]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > - file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to incorrectly have an
> > ASF header on it
> > 
> > 6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> > 
> > 
> > We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the project
> > and most correct for the situation.
> > 
> > Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like the
> > cases where dual headers are appropriate is when there are Major
> > Modifications.  In the case of
> > 
> > np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> > 
> > The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the
> > implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then the
> > community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the changes over that
> > is always based on Numpy so it may be more appropriate to just keep the
> > Numpy license.
> > 
> > Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer resembles
> > the Numpy implementation (Major Modification)?  If so it may be better to
> > keep the Apache Header as going forward the file will represent the work of
> > the MXNet community not that of Numpy.
> > 
> 
> Keeping the (what appears to be) BSD-3 style license is perfectly fine and
> is in fact what the NumPy license says to do.  We would only change the
> license from the NumPy license to ALv2 if an SGA or ICLA is received from
> all contributors historically on this file.  No matter how drastic of
> modifications the MxNet community makes to it, it would always be NumPy
> licensed; so if you did want to avoid including the license in your
> releases you would either need to rely on the file as an external
> dependency or completely reimplement the functionality not deriving it from
> this file.  Whether or not the MxNet community imports upstream changes or
> not is up to them, but either way you have a derived work here.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> > Hopefully the above helps clarify my perspective on how to determine case
> > by case.  I don't see the dual license state as the simpler case in all
> > situations.  I don't believe you would have to get the original committer
> > to relicense the file to you in order to remove the additional license.  I
> > believe the PPMC has all the authority it needs to change the file.  I'd be
> > interested to hear if this is a position that the rest of the
> > Mentors/Incubator agree with.  I know Hen has been involved in some of the
> > conversations in support of dual licenses.  Has this ever required
> > escalation to an 

Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Bob Paulin]

Hi,

I should be more clear.  The 2 options in the case below is

1) Numpy License Headers Only

2) Apache Header with Numpy License Header

Re-reading my original reply does sound like I'm saying the Numpy
license should be removed in the case for the Apache License Headers
from the file.  This was not my intent.  John states it more clearly in
his reply that removal of the Numpy License requires additional steps.


- Bob

On 6/15/2020 3:05 AM, Chen, Ciyong wrote:
> Hi Bob, Leonard,
>
> Thanks for the elaboration/guideline on the dual license issue.
> May I have the conclusion as below based on Bob’s direction/suggestion:
>
>
>   *   If there’s no any different opinion or objection,  keep either origin 
> Numpy license or ASF license but not dual, which depends on how MXNet’s 
> source file evolves when the origin Numpy files changes? And the PPMC has all 
> the authority to change the file like removing the additional license if 
> needed.
>
> Please correct me if I mis-understand anything, and help to determine the 
> best appropriate way to handle such case. Thanks!
>
> Best Regards,
> -Ciyong
>
> From: Bob Paulin 
> Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2020 2:20 AM
> To: lau...@apache.org; d...@mxnet.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: 
> [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party 
> work guidance
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's appropriate to add 
> Apache License Headers to Third Party code across projects.  Here is Justin's 
> email that request the Apache Headers removed [1]
>
> 
>
> - file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to incorrectly have an 
> ASF header on it
>
> 
>
> 6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
>
> 
>
> We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the project and 
> most correct for the situation.
>
> Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like the cases 
> where dual headers are appropriate is when there are Major Modifications.  In 
> the case of
>
> np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
>
> The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the 
> implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then the 
> community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the changes over that is 
> always based on Numpy so it may be more appropriate to just keep the Numpy 
> license.
>
> Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer resembles the 
> Numpy implementation (Major Modification)?  If so it may be better to keep 
> the Apache Header as going forward the file will represent the work of the 
> MXNet community not that of Numpy.
>
> Hopefully the above helps clarify my perspective on how to determine case by 
> case.  I don't see the dual license state as the simpler case in all 
> situations.  I don't believe you would have to get the original committer to 
> relicense the file to you in order to remove the additional license.  I 
> believe the PPMC has all the authority it needs to change the file.  I'd be 
> interested to hear if this is a position that the rest of the 
> Mentors/Incubator agree with.  I know Hen has been involved in some of the 
> conversations in support of dual licenses.  Has this ever required escalation 
> to an actual Lawyer in Legal?  Or have these determinations been low enough 
> risk that we are comfortable with our PMC making best effort decisions based 
> on the ASF guidelines?
>
>
>
> - Bob
>
>
>
> [1] 
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rb83ff64bdac464df2f0cf2fe8fb4c6b9d3b8fa62b645763dc606045f%40%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>
> [2] https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/numpy/core/einsumfunc.py
> On 6/12/2020 7:20 PM, Leonard Lausen wrote:
>
> Thank you Bob for the elaboration. PPMC would like to minimize complexity,
>
> that's why we ask for your recommendation.
>
>
>
> If it's easiest to just keep the original license header, we can do that. Do 
> we
>
> need the contributor to re-license their contribution, or is the contribution
>
> already available under both licenses as both license headers were included by
>
> the contributor and the ASF header can simply be deleted?
>
>
>
> Reading through the threads you referenced, there does not seem to be a strong
>
> consensus in the ASF about how to handle this situation. For example, quoting
>
> Roman Shaposhnik [2] in support of just putting 2 License Headers for
>
> simplicity:
>
>
>
> Hm. This is tricky, now that I re-read the language of the ASF license
>
> header I'm not sure anymore. I *think* the langu

Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Bob Paulin]

For clarity the "additional license" in this case is the Apache License
Header that a contributor added above the numpy license.  I agree that
the original license should remain if the file is considered derived in
anyway.  The podling was asking if they had authority to make the change
to remove the Apache License or if they needed to reach out to the
original contributor to re-license the code.  I believe they have that
authority with or without the contributor's permission.

- Bob



On 6/15/2020 7:39 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> HI,
>
>> *   If there’s no any different opinion or objection,  keep either origin 
>> Numpy license or ASF license but not dual, which depends on how MXNet’s 
>> source file evolves when the origin Numpy files changes?
> IMO only if there are significant changes to the file, if in doubt I’d keep 
> the original license.
>
>> And the PPMC has all the authority to change the file like removing the 
>> additional license if needed.
> I would say they don’t unless the 3rd party agrees or the overwhelming 
> majority of the code is no longer under the original license.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[John D. Ament]

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 2:19 PM Bob Paulin  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's appropriate to
> add Apache License Headers to Third Party code across projects.  Here is
> Justin's email that request the Apache Headers removed [1]
>
> 
>
> - file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to incorrectly have an 
> ASF header on it
> 
> 6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
> 
>
> We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the project
> and most correct for the situation.
>
> Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like the
> cases where dual headers are appropriate is when there are Major
> Modifications.  In the case of
>
> np_einsum_path_op-inl.h
>
> The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the
> implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then the
> community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the changes over that
> is always based on Numpy so it may be more appropriate to just keep the
> Numpy license.
>
> Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer resembles
> the Numpy implementation (Major Modification)?  If so it may be better to
> keep the Apache Header as going forward the file will represent the work of
> the MXNet community not that of Numpy.
>

Keeping the (what appears to be) BSD-3 style license is perfectly fine and
is in fact what the NumPy license says to do.  We would only change the
license from the NumPy license to ALv2 if an SGA or ICLA is received from
all contributors historically on this file.  No matter how drastic of
modifications the MxNet community makes to it, it would always be NumPy
licensed; so if you did want to avoid including the license in your
releases you would either need to rely on the file as an external
dependency or completely reimplement the functionality not deriving it from
this file.  Whether or not the MxNet community imports upstream changes or
not is up to them, but either way you have a derived work here.

John


>
> Hopefully the above helps clarify my perspective on how to determine case
> by case.  I don't see the dual license state as the simpler case in all
> situations.  I don't believe you would have to get the original committer
> to relicense the file to you in order to remove the additional license.  I
> believe the PPMC has all the authority it needs to change the file.  I'd be
> interested to hear if this is a position that the rest of the
> Mentors/Incubator agree with.  I know Hen has been involved in some of the
> conversations in support of dual licenses.  Has this ever required
> escalation to an actual Lawyer in Legal?  Or have these determinations been
> low enough risk that we are comfortable with our PMC making best effort
> decisions based on the ASF guidelines?
>
>
> - Bob
>
>
> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rb83ff64bdac464df2f0cf2fe8fb4c6b9d3b8fa62b645763dc606045f%40%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>
> [2] https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/numpy/core/einsumfunc.py
> On 6/12/2020 7:20 PM, Leonard Lausen wrote:
>
> Thank you Bob for the elaboration. PPMC would like to minimize complexity,
> that's why we ask for your recommendation.
>
> If it's easiest to just keep the original license header, we can do that. Do 
> we
> need the contributor to re-license their contribution, or is the contribution
> already available under both licenses as both license headers were included by
> the contributor and the ASF header can simply be deleted?
>
> Reading through the threads you referenced, there does not seem to be a strong
> consensus in the ASF about how to handle this situation. For example, quoting
> Roman Shaposhnik [2] in support of just putting 2 License Headers for
> simplicity:
>
>
> Hm. This is tricky, now that I re-read the language of the ASF license
> header I'm not sure anymore. I *think* the language there should allow
> you to slap said header on a compatible license code.
>
> Besides, the alternative is much messier: every time somebody touches
> that file he/she needs to decide whether it is time for an ASF header
> or not.
>
> I *think* (but I'd love for old-timers to chime in and correct me) that #3-5
> were written from though-shall-not-fork-communities perspective.
>
> Can we follow this approach (keep 2 License headers) for simplicity (assuming
> removal of ASF header will require extra steps)?
>
>
> With respect to einsumfunc.py [5] vs np_einsum_op.cc [6] if this is in
> fact a port where the behavior was copied/derived directly from numpy I
> could see that as supporting Justin's case that the Apache header should
> be removed.  However that is ju

Re: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Justin Mclean]

HI,

> *   If there’s no any different opinion or objection,  keep either origin 
> Numpy license or ASF license but not dual, which depends on how MXNet’s 
> source file evolves when the origin Numpy files changes?

IMO only if there are significant changes to the file, if in doubt I’d keep the 
original license.

> And the PPMC has all the authority to change the file like removing the 
> additional license if needed.

I would say they don’t unless the 3rd party agrees or the overwhelming majority 
of the code is no longer under the original license.

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

RE: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Chen, Ciyong]

Hi Bob, Leonard,

Thanks for the elaboration/guideline on the dual license issue.
May I have the conclusion as below based on Bob’s direction/suggestion:


  *   If there’s no any different opinion or objection,  keep either origin 
Numpy license or ASF license but not dual, which depends on how MXNet’s source 
file evolves when the origin Numpy files changes? And the PPMC has all the 
authority to change the file like removing the additional license if needed.

Please correct me if I mis-understand anything, and help to determine the best 
appropriate way to handle such case. Thanks!

Best Regards,
-Ciyong

From: Bob Paulin 
Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2020 2:20 AM
To: lau...@apache.org; d...@mxnet.apache.org; general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: 
[MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party 
work guidance


Hi,

I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's appropriate to add 
Apache License Headers to Third Party code across projects.  Here is Justin's 
email that request the Apache Headers removed [1]



- file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to incorrectly have an 
ASF header on it



6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h



We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the project and 
most correct for the situation.

Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like the cases 
where dual headers are appropriate is when there are Major Modifications.  In 
the case of

np_einsum_path_op-inl.h

The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the 
implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then the 
community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the changes over that is 
always based on Numpy so it may be more appropriate to just keep the Numpy 
license.

Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer resembles the 
Numpy implementation (Major Modification)?  If so it may be better to keep the 
Apache Header as going forward the file will represent the work of the MXNet 
community not that of Numpy.

Hopefully the above helps clarify my perspective on how to determine case by 
case.  I don't see the dual license state as the simpler case in all 
situations.  I don't believe you would have to get the original committer to 
relicense the file to you in order to remove the additional license.  I believe 
the PPMC has all the authority it needs to change the file.  I'd be interested 
to hear if this is a position that the rest of the Mentors/Incubator agree 
with.  I know Hen has been involved in some of the conversations in support of 
dual licenses.  Has this ever required escalation to an actual Lawyer in Legal? 
 Or have these determinations been low enough risk that we are comfortable with 
our PMC making best effort decisions based on the ASF guidelines?



- Bob



[1] 
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rb83ff64bdac464df2f0cf2fe8fb4c6b9d3b8fa62b645763dc606045f%40%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E

[2] https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/numpy/core/einsumfunc.py
On 6/12/2020 7:20 PM, Leonard Lausen wrote:

Thank you Bob for the elaboration. PPMC would like to minimize complexity,

that's why we ask for your recommendation.



If it's easiest to just keep the original license header, we can do that. Do we

need the contributor to re-license their contribution, or is the contribution

already available under both licenses as both license headers were included by

the contributor and the ASF header can simply be deleted?



Reading through the threads you referenced, there does not seem to be a strong

consensus in the ASF about how to handle this situation. For example, quoting

Roman Shaposhnik [2] in support of just putting 2 License Headers for

simplicity:



Hm. This is tricky, now that I re-read the language of the ASF license

header I'm not sure anymore. I *think* the language there should allow

you to slap said header on a compatible license code.



Besides, the alternative is much messier: every time somebody touches

that file he/she needs to decide whether it is time for an ASF header

or not.



I *think* (but I'd love for old-timers to chime in and correct me) that #3-5

were written from though-shall-not-fork-communities perspective.

Can we follow this approach (keep 2 License headers) for simplicity (assuming

removal of ASF header will require extra steps)?



With respect to einsumfunc.py [5] vs np_einsum_op.cc [6] if this is in

fact a port where the behavior was copied/derived directly from numpy I

could see that as supporting Justin's case that the Apache header should

be removed.  However that is just my opinion.

Which email of Justin are you referring to?



Best regards

Leonard





[1]: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#purpose

[2]:

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ef46b1d0a3dd865d27a33c290430d892d3373d4bc5e27b5f06c7bcda

[DISCUSS] When to add Apache Headers to Third Party Code [WAS] Re: [MENTORS] PPMC case-by-case decision for major modifications of third-party work guidance

[Bob Paulin]

Hi,

I agree there does not appear to be consensus on when it's appropriate
to add Apache License Headers to Third Party code across projects.  Here
is Justin's email that request the Apache Headers removed [1]



- file copyright  NumPy Developers [6] this file look to incorrectly have an 
ASF header on it

6. ./src/operator/numpy/np_einsum_path_op-inl.h


We want to make the choice that will be most sustainable for the project
and most correct for the situation. 

Based on the emails I linked in the prior email it does seem like the
cases where dual headers are appropriate is when there are Major
Modifications.  In the case of

np_einsum_path_op-inl.h

The file is derived from the implementation in Numpy [2].  If the
implementation in Numpy changes will this file change?  If so then the
community will be tasked with continuing to re-port the changes over
that is always based on Numpy so it may be more appropriate to just keep
the Numpy license. 

Will MXNet likely evolve this file in a way that it's no longer
resembles the Numpy implementation (Major Modification)?  If so it may
be better to keep the Apache Header as going forward the file will
represent the work of the MXNet community not that of Numpy. 

Hopefully the above helps clarify my perspective on how to determine
case by case.  I don't see the dual license state as the simpler case in
all situations.  I don't believe you would have to get the original
committer to relicense the file to you in order to remove the additional
license.  I believe the PPMC has all the authority it needs to change
the file.  I'd be interested to hear if this is a position that the rest
of the Mentors/Incubator agree with.  I know Hen has been involved in
some of the conversations in support of dual licenses.  Has this ever
required escalation to an actual Lawyer in Legal?  Or have these
determinations been low enough risk that we are comfortable with our PMC
making best effort decisions based on the ASF guidelines?


- Bob


[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rb83ff64bdac464df2f0cf2fe8fb4c6b9d3b8fa62b645763dc606045f%40%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E

[2] https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/numpy/core/einsumfunc.py

On 6/12/2020 7:20 PM, Leonard Lausen wrote:
> Thank you Bob for the elaboration. PPMC would like to minimize complexity,
> that's why we ask for your recommendation.
>
> If it's easiest to just keep the original license header, we can do that. Do 
> we
> need the contributor to re-license their contribution, or is the contribution
> already available under both licenses as both license headers were included by
> the contributor and the ASF header can simply be deleted?
>
> Reading through the threads you referenced, there does not seem to be a strong
> consensus in the ASF about how to handle this situation. For example, quoting
> Roman Shaposhnik [2] in support of just putting 2 License Headers for
> simplicity:
>
>> Hm. This is tricky, now that I re-read the language of the ASF license
>> header I'm not sure anymore. I *think* the language there should allow
>> you to slap said header on a compatible license code.
>>
>> Besides, the alternative is much messier: every time somebody touches
>> that file he/she needs to decide whether it is time for an ASF header
>> or not.
>>
>> I *think* (but I'd love for old-timers to chime in and correct me) that #3-5
>> were written from though-shall-not-fork-communities perspective.
> Can we follow this approach (keep 2 License headers) for simplicity (assuming
> removal of ASF header will require extra steps)?
>
>> With respect to einsumfunc.py [5] vs np_einsum_op.cc [6] if this is in
>> fact a port where the behavior was copied/derived directly from numpy I
>> could see that as supporting Justin's case that the Apache header should
>> be removed.  However that is just my opinion.
> Which email of Justin are you referring to?
>
> Best regards
> Leonard
>
>
> [1]: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#purpose
> [2]: 
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ef46b1d0a3dd865d27a33c290430d892d3373d4bc5e27b5f06c7bcda%401451951295%40%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
>
>
> On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 21:39 -0500, Bob Paulin wrote:
>> First general disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. 
>>
>> Second Disclaimer with an engineer hat on we want to avoid copying third
>> party code into the project since it increases the amount of maintenance
>> in a sense from a code standpoint and from a licensing standpoint.  If
>> at all possible it is preferable to either link or try to find a way to
>> integrate your tweaks back into the other projects before taking on the
>> burden of housing the code in MXNet.  I do hope these options were
>> considered or are being looked at for refactoring 

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #58: Add joining the IPMC and fix heading levels

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #58: Add joining the IPMC and fix heading 
levels
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/58
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #58: Add joining the IPMC and fix heading levels

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #58: Add joining the IPMC and fix 
heading levels
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/58
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

Re: Add some instructions or make the link available on Nuttx home page

[jincheng sun]

Hi Flavio,

Thanks for checking the page of `apache.org`, you can view the screenshot
directly in [1] attachment or [2]. At present, I can't see the link at
apache.org. Maybe it's the polling display(I am not sure)

Best,
Jincheng

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19576
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12988907/apachehome.png


Flavio Junqueira  于2019年12月16日周一 下午11:06写道：

> Hi Jincheng,
>
> The status page is now live and being populated:
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/nuttx.html
>
> I'm not sure where the broken link in the main apache.org page is.
>
> -Flavio
>
> > On 16 Dec 2019, at 08:07, jincheng sun  wrote:
> >
> > I found there is a link of NuttX is not work in home page of `apache.org
> `[1].
> > So, I create a JIRA for this issue [2]. But I found is not the issue for
> `
> > apache.org` but something worng in NuttX home page [3]. I do not know
> how
> > to deal with this kind of problems, so, report the problems in this
> > maillist.
> >
> > Best,
> > Jincheng
> >
> > [1] http://apache.org/
> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19576
> > [3] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/nuttx.html
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Add some instructions or make the link available on Nuttx home page

[Flavio Junqueira]

Hi Jincheng,

The status page is now live and being populated:

http://incubator.apache.org/projects/nuttx.html

I'm not sure where the broken link in the main apache.org page is.

-Flavio

> On 16 Dec 2019, at 08:07, jincheng sun  wrote:
> 
> I found there is a link of NuttX is not work in home page of `apache.org`[1].
> So, I create a JIRA for this issue [2]. But I found is not the issue for `
> apache.org` but something worng in NuttX home page [3]. I do not know how
> to deal with this kind of problems, so, report the problems in this
> maillist.
> 
> Best,
> Jincheng
> 
> [1] http://apache.org/
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19576
> [3] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/nuttx.html


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

Add some instructions or make the link available on Nuttx home page

[jincheng sun]

I found there is a link of NuttX is not work in home page of `apache.org`[1].
So, I create a JIRA for this issue [2]. But I found is not the issue for `
apache.org` but something worng in NuttX home page [3]. I do not know how
to deal with this kind of problems, so, report the problems in this
maillist.

Best,
Jincheng

[1] http://apache.org/
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-19576
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/nuttx.html

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #51: Add some headings to break up the content and some history and stats

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #51: Add some headings to break up the content 
and some history and stats
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/51
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #51: Add some headings to break up the content and some history and stats

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #51: Add some headings to break up the 
content and some history and stats
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/51
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

Re: Add branding/trademark question to podling template

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

I've added a question about branding and naming to the proposal document and to 
the report template.

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

Re: Add branding/trademark question to podling template

[Dave Fisher]

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 9, 2019, at 7:37 PM, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Perhaps it was unclear but I was thinking of adding that to teh quarterly 
> report.
> 
>> I would start with:
>> 
>> 0. Has the VP, Brand approved the project name? Does the podling understand 
>> the nuances
> 
> Where you thinking of adding this to the podling proposal right?

The VP, Brand’s approval is a graduation requirement and needs to be reported 
quarterly.

Confirming that the trademark is donated is also important.

So, both.

Regards,
Dave 
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> 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: Add branding/trademark question to podling template

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

Perhaps it was unclear but I was thinking of adding that to teh quarterly 
report.

> I would start with:
> 
> 0. Has the VP, Brand approved the project name? Does the podling understand 
> the nuances

Where you thinking of adding this to the podling proposal right?

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

Re: Add branding/trademark question to podling template

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Justin,

Thank you for bringing this issue forward!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 9, 2019, at 3:31 PM, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Given a few issues that have come up recently, and it seems to be something 
> that some podlings check just before they want to graduate rather than 
> actively manage, I'm thinking of putting in a question in the podling report 
> about branding and trademarks.
> 
> Some ideas for the question (no need to add more than one) below:
> 1. Is the PPMC actively managing the podlings brand and trademarks?
> 2. Are 3rd parties respecting and correctly using the podlings name and brand?
> 3. What actions did the PPMC take to manage the use of it name and brand?
> 
> Can anyone suggest a better one? Which one do you think will be most 
> effective in making podling take action on this?

I would start with:

0. Has the VP, Brand approved the project name? Does the podling understand the 
nuances

On podling proposals we need to know if a podling needs a unique name. We need 
to ask if the trademark will be assigned.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> 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

Add branding/trademark question to podling template

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

Given a few issues that have come up recently, and it seems to be something 
that some podlings check just before they want to graduate rather than actively 
manage, I'm thinking of putting in a question in the podling report about 
branding and trademarks.

Some ideas for the question (no need to add more than one) below:
1. Is the PPMC actively managing the podlings brand and trademarks?
2. Are 3rd parties respecting and correctly using the podlings name and brand?
3. What actions did the PPMC take to manage the use of it name and brand?

Can anyone suggest a better one? Which one do you think will be most effective 
in making podling take action on this?

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #38: Add a little more information and simplify some language.

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #38: Add a little more information and 
simplify some language.
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/38
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #38: Add a little more information and simplify some language.

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #38: Add a little more information and 
simplify some language.
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/38
 
 
   left this file out of last PR


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #37: Add a little more information and simplify some language.

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #37: Add a little more information and 
simplify some language.
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/37
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #37: Add a little more information and simplify some language.

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #37: Add a little more information and 
simplify some language.
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/37
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

Fwd: [ASK helps from mentors] How to transfer/add the moderators for mail list

[Sheng Wu]

Hi IPMC

How to transfer or add the moderator of the mail list, today, I am still
the only one, because I created for the new project and PPMC.

I am guessing from some mail list command?

Sheng Wu 吴晟

Apache SkyWalking
Apache Incubator
Apache ShardingSphere, ECharts, DolphinScheduler podlings
Zipkin
Twitter, wusheng1108

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #30: add information on disclaimer to release management page

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #30: add information on disclaimer to release 
management page
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/30
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #30: add information on disclaimer to release management page

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #30: add information on disclaimer to 
release management page
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/30
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #27: Add some links to some other Apache Way / incubator talks

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #27: Add some links to some other Apache Way / 
incubator talks
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/27
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #27: Add some links to some other Apache Way / incubator talks

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #27: Add some links to some other Apache 
Way / incubator talks
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/27
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #22: add WIP disclaimer

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #22: add WIP disclaimer
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/22
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #22: add WIP disclaimer

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #22: add WIP disclaimer
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/22
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean opened a new pull request #19: add requirement to have incubating in name

[GitBox]

justinmclean opened a new pull request #19: add requirement to have incubating 
in name
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/19
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[GitHub] [incubator] justinmclean merged pull request #19: add requirement to have incubating in name

[GitBox]

justinmclean merged pull request #19: add requirement to have incubating in name
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator/pull/19
 
 
   


This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

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

[jira] [Commented] (INCUBATOR-203) Rename Proposals to something else, add more how to get in information

[Dave Fisher (JIRA)]

[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-203?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16801391#comment-16801391
 ] 

Dave Fisher commented on INCUBATOR-203:
---

Really this can be about updating the Podling Proposal Menu to better separate 
guidance from policy.

> Rename Proposals to something else, add more how to get in information
> --
>
> Key: INCUBATOR-203
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-203
> Project: Incubator
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Components: guides
>Reporter: John D. Ament
>Assignee: Dave Fisher
>Priority: Major
>
> The current proposal top level menu item is good, but lacks some useful 
> information.  Instead of being called proposals, maybe call it "Becoming an 
> Apache Project" and include some information:
> - Proposal process
> - Update entry to give a higher level how it works
> - Include docs on SGAs, IP Clearance, when each is needed



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

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

[jira] [Assigned] (INCUBATOR-203) Rename Proposals to something else, add more how to get in information

[Dave Fisher (JIRA)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-203?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Dave Fisher reassigned INCUBATOR-203:
-

Assignee: (was: Dave Fisher)

> Rename Proposals to something else, add more how to get in information
> --
>
> Key: INCUBATOR-203
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-203
> Project: Incubator
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Components: guides
>Reporter: John D. Ament
>Priority: Major
>
> The current proposal top level menu item is good, but lacks some useful 
> information.  Instead of being called proposals, maybe call it "Becoming an 
> Apache Project" and include some information:
> - Proposal process
> - Update entry to give a higher level how it works
> - Include docs on SGAs, IP Clearance, when each is needed



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

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

[jira] [Assigned] (INCUBATOR-203) Rename Proposals to something else, add more how to get in information

[Dave Fisher (JIRA)]

 [ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-203?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Dave Fisher reassigned INCUBATOR-203:
-

Assignee: Dave Fisher

> Rename Proposals to something else, add more how to get in information
> --
>
> Key: INCUBATOR-203
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-203
> Project: Incubator
>  Issue Type: Improvement
>  Components: guides
>Reporter: John D. Ament
>Assignee: Dave Fisher
>Priority: Major
>
> The current proposal top level menu item is good, but lacks some useful 
> information.  Instead of being called proposals, maybe call it "Becoming an 
> Apache Project" and include some information:
> - Proposal process
> - Update entry to give a higher level how it works
> - Include docs on SGAs, IP Clearance, when each is needed



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

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

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Bertrand,

We are ok now since Jenkins does currently have JBake 2.6.3 which packages the 
other dependencies. I’ve updated to use that and everything is good.

> On Mar 22, 2019, at 3:57 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 6:49 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> ...JBake v2.5.1 (2017-01-31 23:24:52PM) [http://jbake.org]
>>> Maybe get that updated? ...
> 
> FWIW for the Sling website [1] we are using the jbake-maven-plugin for
> the build, so the right version gets downloaded from Maven Central and
> the build just needs an acceptable version of Maven, which should be
> easier to get than JBake.

I see Sling is using 2.5.1. I think that this could be good as we move forward. 
I looked at the dependencies and I wonder how they will change for the latest 
2.6.4?

> 
> I could do the change for Incubator but won't have time before mid
> next week probably, so if someone wants to beat me to that that would
> be cool ;-)

If you would like then sure. I have admin rights now on Jenkins and could help 
put the change into production.

I’ve been thinking about the next steps and think that we have some discussions 
that will require co-ordination, but this is another subject and thread.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> -Bertrand
> 
> [1] https://github.com/apache/sling-site
> 
> -
> 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: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 6:49 PM Dave Fisher  wrote:
> ...JBake v2.5.1 (2017-01-31 23:24:52PM) [http://jbake.org]
> > Maybe get that updated? ...

FWIW for the Sling website [1] we are using the jbake-maven-plugin for
the build, so the right version gets downloaded from Maven Central and
the build just needs an acceptable version of Maven, which should be
easier to get than JBake.

I could do the change for Incubator but won't have time before mid
next week probably, so if someone wants to beat me to that that would
be cool ;-)

-Bertrand

[1] https://github.com/apache/sling-site

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

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[Dave Fisher]

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:18 PM, sebb  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 19:00, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 11:25 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 10:54 AM, sebb  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:49, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Worked for me locally running JBake 2.6.4.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Me too!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I think the build host must have an old version of JBake/Asciidoctor
>>>>> 
>>>>> JBake v2.5.1 (2017-01-31 23:24:52PM) [http://jbake.org]
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Maybe get that updated?
>>>>> 
>>>>> That would be great. Who is in charge of this? Infra directly or should I 
>>>>> go to builds@.
>>>> 
>>>> Try raising an Infra JIRA.
>>> 
>>> 2.6.3 is there. I’m just figuring out how invoke it properly - the jar 
>>> thing fails.
>>> 
>>> If it works great.
>> 
>> It works now but the color highlight is gone ….
> 
> Great.
> 
> What highlight?

I had an old version of css/incubator.css stuck in my browser cache. I had to 
force the refresh. I wonder about DTM on these files…

Are we baking properly - another problem for another day!

Regards,
Dave

> 
>>> 
>>> I still think we should upgrade, but that is another, deeper issue.
>> 
>> I’ll request this if it looks like it is required.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Dave
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Well, I like the idea, but now the table is broken and coloring is lost.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> OK. Thanks!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
>>>>>>>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
>>>>>>>>> new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>>>>>>>>> 55ed423 is described below
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
>>>>>>>>> Author: Sebb 
>>>>>>>>> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 
>>>>>>>>> +++
>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>>>>> index d84827a..9132608 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>>>>> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
>>>>>>>>> |===
>>>>>>>>> |link:#h-project[Podling]
>>>>>>>>> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
>>>>>>>>> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
>>>>>>>>> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
>>>>>>>>> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
>>>>>>>>> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
>>>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
>>>>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
>>>>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
>>>>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
>&g

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[sebb]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 19:00, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 21, 2019, at 11:25 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Mar 21, 2019, at 10:54 AM, sebb  wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:49, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Worked for me locally running JBake 2.6.4.
> >>>
> >>> Me too!
> >>>>
> >>>> I think the build host must have an old version of JBake/Asciidoctor
> >>>
> >>> JBake v2.5.1 (2017-01-31 23:24:52PM) [http://jbake.org]
> >>>
> >>>> Maybe get that updated?
> >>>
> >>> That would be great. Who is in charge of this? Infra directly or should I 
> >>> go to builds@.
> >>
> >> Try raising an Infra JIRA.
> >
> > 2.6.3 is there. I’m just figuring out how invoke it properly - the jar 
> > thing fails.
> >
> > If it works great.
>
> It works now but the color highlight is gone ….

Great.

What highlight?

> >
> > I still think we should upgrade, but that is another, deeper issue.
>
> I’ll request this if it looks like it is required.

Thanks.

> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave
> >
> >>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Dave
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Well, I like the idea, but now the table is broken and coloring is lost.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> OK. Thanks!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
> >>>>>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
> >>>>>>> new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
> >>>>>>> 55ed423 is described below
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
> >>>>>>> Author: Sebb 
> >>>>>>> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 
> >>>>>>> +++
> >>>>>>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >>>>>>> index d84827a..9132608 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >>>>>>> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >>>>>>> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
> >>>>>>> |===
> >>>>>>> |link:#h-project[Podling]
> >>>>>>> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-numbercommitters[I]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasrepos[K]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-hastracker[L]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasdevlist[M]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-hascommitslist[N]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-haswebsite[O]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q]
> >>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasrelease[R]
> >>>>>>> +|link:#h-st

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[Dave Fisher]

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 11:25 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 10:54 AM, sebb  wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:49, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Worked for me locally running JBake 2.6.4.
>>> 
>>> Me too!
>>>> 
>>>> I think the build host must have an old version of JBake/Asciidoctor
>>> 
>>> JBake v2.5.1 (2017-01-31 23:24:52PM) [http://jbake.org]
>>> 
>>>> Maybe get that updated?
>>> 
>>> That would be great. Who is in charge of this? Infra directly or should I 
>>> go to builds@.
>> 
>> Try raising an Infra JIRA.
> 
> 2.6.3 is there. I’m just figuring out how invoke it properly - the jar thing 
> fails.
> 
> If it works great.

It works now but the color highlight is gone ….

> 
> I still think we should upgrade, but that is another, deeper issue.

I’ll request this if it looks like it is required.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Regards,
> Dave
> 
>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Well, I like the idea, but now the table is broken and coloring is lost.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> OK. Thanks!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
>>>>>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
>>>>>>> new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>>>>>>> 55ed423 is described below
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
>>>>>>> Author: Sebb 
>>>>>>> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 
>>>>>>> +++
>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>>> index d84827a..9132608 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>>> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>>> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
>>>>>>> |===
>>>>>>> |link:#h-project[Podling]
>>>>>>> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-numbercommitters[I]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasrepos[K]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hastracker[L]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasdevlist[M]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hascommitslist[N]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-haswebsite[O]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q]
>>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasrelease[R]
>>>>>>> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
>>>>>>> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
>>>>>>> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
>>>>>>> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
>>>>>>> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
>>>>>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
>>>>>>> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
>>>>>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Co

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[Dave Fisher]

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 10:54 AM, sebb  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:49, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Worked for me locally running JBake 2.6.4.
>> 
>> Me too!
>>> 
>>> I think the build host must have an old version of JBake/Asciidoctor
>> 
>> JBake v2.5.1 (2017-01-31 23:24:52PM) [http://jbake.org]
>> 
>>> Maybe get that updated?
>> 
>> That would be great. Who is in charge of this? Infra directly or should I go 
>> to builds@.
> 
> Try raising an Infra JIRA.

2.6.3 is there. I’m just figuring out how invoke it properly - the jar thing 
fails.

If it works great.

I still think we should upgrade, but that is another, deeper issue.

Regards,
Dave

> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Well, I like the idea, but now the table is broken and coloring is lost.
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> OK. Thanks!
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
>>>>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
>>>>>>  new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>>>>>> 55ed423 is described below
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
>>>>>> Author: Sebb 
>>>>>> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 
>>>>>> +++
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>> index d84827a..9132608 100644
>>>>>> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>>>> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
>>>>>> |===
>>>>>> |link:#h-project[Podling]
>>>>>> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-numbercommitters[I]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasrepos[K]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-hastracker[L]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasdevlist[M]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-hascommitslist[N]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-haswebsite[O]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q]
>>>>>> -|link:#h-hasrelease[R]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
>>>>>> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[sebb]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:49, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Worked for me locally running JBake 2.6.4.
>
> Me too!
> >
> > I think the build host must have an old version of JBake/Asciidoctor
>
> JBake v2.5.1 (2017-01-31 23:24:52PM) [http://jbake.org]
>
> > Maybe get that updated?
>
> That would be great. Who is in charge of this? Infra directly or should I go 
> to builds@.

Try raising an Infra JIRA.

> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, I like the idea, but now the table is broken and coloring is lost.
> >>
> >>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> OK. Thanks!
> >>>
> >>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
> >>>>
> >>>> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
> >>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
> >>>>   new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
> >>>> 55ed423 is described below
> >>>>
> >>>> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
> >>>> Author: Sebb 
> >>>> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
> >>>>
> >>>>  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
> >>>> ---
> >>>> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 
> >>>> +++
> >>>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >>>> index d84827a..9132608 100644
> >>>> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >>>> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >>>> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
> >>>> |===
> >>>> |link:#h-project[Podling]
> >>>> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
> >>>> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
> >>>> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
> >>>> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
> >>>> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
> >>>> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
> >>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
> >>>> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
> >>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
> >>>> -|link:#h-numbercommitters[I]
> >>>> -|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J]
> >>>> -|link:#h-hasrepos[K]
> >>>> -|link:#h-hastracker[L]
> >>>> -|link:#h-hasdevlist[M]
> >>>> -|link:#h-hascommitslist[N]
> >>>> -|link:#h-haswebsite[O]
> >>>> -|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P]
> >>>> -|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q]
> >>>> -|link:#h-hasrelease[R]
> >>>> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
> >>>> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
> >>>> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
> >>>> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
> >>>> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
> >>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
> >>>> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
> >>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
> >>>> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
> >>>> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
> >>>> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
> >>>> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
> >>>> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
> >>>> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
> >>>> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
> >>>> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,title=Has a Distribution Area]
> >>>> +|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q,title=Has Release Signing Keys]
> >>>> +|link:#h-hasrelease[R,title=Has a Release in the Distribution Area]
> >>>>
> >>>> include::_includes/clutchr.ad[]
> >>>>
> >>>> +|link:#h-project[Podling]
> >>>> +|link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
> >>>> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
> >>>> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapse

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[Dave Fisher]

> 
> Worked for me locally running JBake 2.6.4.

Me too!
> 
> I think the build host must have an old version of JBake/Asciidoctor

JBake v2.5.1 (2017-01-31 23:24:52PM) [http://jbake.org]

> Maybe get that updated?

That would be great. Who is in charge of this? Infra directly or should I go to 
builds@.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> 
>> Well, I like the idea, but now the table is broken and coloring is lost.
>> 
>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>> 
>>> OK. Thanks!
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>>>> 
>>>> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
>>>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
>>>>   new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>>>> 55ed423 is described below
>>>> 
>>>> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
>>>> Author: Sebb 
>>>> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
>>>> 
>>>>  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>>>> ---
>>>> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 
>>>> +++
>>>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>> index d84827a..9132608 100644
>>>> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>>>> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
>>>> |===
>>>> |link:#h-project[Podling]
>>>> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
>>>> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
>>>> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
>>>> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
>>>> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
>>>> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
>>>> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
>>>> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
>>>> -|link:#h-numbercommitters[I]
>>>> -|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J]
>>>> -|link:#h-hasrepos[K]
>>>> -|link:#h-hastracker[L]
>>>> -|link:#h-hasdevlist[M]
>>>> -|link:#h-hascommitslist[N]
>>>> -|link:#h-haswebsite[O]
>>>> -|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P]
>>>> -|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q]
>>>> -|link:#h-hasrelease[R]
>>>> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
>>>> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
>>>> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
>>>> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
>>>> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
>>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
>>>> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
>>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
>>>> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
>>>> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
>>>> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
>>>> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
>>>> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
>>>> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
>>>> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
>>>> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,title=Has a Distribution Area]
>>>> +|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q,title=Has Release Signing Keys]
>>>> +|link:#h-hasrelease[R,title=Has a Release in the Distribution Area]
>>>> 
>>>> include::_includes/clutchr.ad[]
>>>> 
>>>> +|link:#h-project[Podling]
>>>> +|link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
>>>> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
>>>> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
>>>> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
>>>> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
>>>> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
>>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
>>>> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
>>>> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
>>>> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
>>>> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
>>>> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[sebb]

Worked for me locally running JBake 2.6.4.

I think the build host must have an old version of JBake/Asciidoctor

Maybe get that updated?

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 17:21, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> Well, I like the idea, but now the table is broken and coloring is lost.
>
> > On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> >
> > OK. Thanks!
> >
> >> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
> >>
> >> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
> >>
> >> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
> >> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
> >>
> >>
> >> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
> >>new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
> >> 55ed423 is described below
> >>
> >> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
> >> Author: Sebb 
> >> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
> >>
> >>   Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
> >> ---
> >> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 
> >> +++
> >> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >> index d84827a..9132608 100644
> >> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
> >> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
> >> |===
> >> |link:#h-project[Podling]
> >> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
> >> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
> >> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
> >> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
> >> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
> >> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
> >> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
> >> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
> >> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
> >> -|link:#h-numbercommitters[I]
> >> -|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J]
> >> -|link:#h-hasrepos[K]
> >> -|link:#h-hastracker[L]
> >> -|link:#h-hasdevlist[M]
> >> -|link:#h-hascommitslist[N]
> >> -|link:#h-haswebsite[O]
> >> -|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P]
> >> -|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q]
> >> -|link:#h-hasrelease[R]
> >> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
> >> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
> >> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
> >> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
> >> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
> >> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
> >> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
> >> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
> >> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
> >> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
> >> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
> >> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
> >> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
> >> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
> >> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
> >> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,title=Has a Distribution Area]
> >> +|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q,title=Has Release Signing Keys]
> >> +|link:#h-hasrelease[R,title=Has a Release in the Distribution Area]
> >>
> >> include::_includes/clutchr.ad[]
> >>
> >> +|link:#h-project[Podling]
> >> +|link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
> >> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
> >> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
> >> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
> >> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
> >> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
> >> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
> >> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
> >> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
> >> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
> >> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
> >> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
> >> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
> >> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
> >> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
> >> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
> >> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,title=Has a Distribution Area]
> >> +|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q,title=Has Release Signing Keys]
> >> +|link:#h-hasrelease[R,title=Has a Release in the Dis

Re: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[Dave Fisher]

Well, I like the idea, but now the table is broken and coloring is lost.

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:59 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> OK. Thanks!
> 
>> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
>> 
>> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>> 
>> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
>> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
>> 
>> 
>> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
>>new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>> 55ed423 is described below
>> 
>> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
>> Author: Sebb 
>> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
>> 
>>   Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
>> ---
>> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 
>> +++
>> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>> index d84827a..9132608 100644
>> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
>> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
>> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
>> |===
>> |link:#h-project[Podling]
>> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
>> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
>> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
>> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
>> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
>> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
>> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
>> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
>> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
>> -|link:#h-numbercommitters[I]
>> -|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J]
>> -|link:#h-hasrepos[K]
>> -|link:#h-hastracker[L]
>> -|link:#h-hasdevlist[M]
>> -|link:#h-hascommitslist[N]
>> -|link:#h-haswebsite[O]
>> -|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P]
>> -|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q]
>> -|link:#h-hasrelease[R]
>> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
>> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
>> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
>> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
>> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
>> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
>> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
>> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
>> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
>> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
>> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
>> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
>> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
>> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
>> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
>> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,title=Has a Distribution Area]
>> +|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q,title=Has Release Signing Keys]
>> +|link:#h-hasrelease[R,title=Has a Release in the Distribution Area]
>> 
>> include::_includes/clutchr.ad[]
>> 
>> +|link:#h-project[Podling]
>> +|link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
>> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
>> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
>> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
>> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
>> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
>> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
>> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
>> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
>> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
>> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
>> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
>> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
>> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
>> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
>> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
>> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,title=Has a Distribution Area]
>> +|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q,title=Has Release Signing Keys]
>> +|link:#h-hasrelease[R,title=Has a Release in the Distribution Area]
>> +
>> |===
>> 
>> [[definitions]]
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cvs-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: cvs-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: [incubator] branch master updated: Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table

[Dave Fisher]

OK. Thanks!

> On Mar 21, 2019, at 9:55 AM, s...@apache.org wrote:
> 
> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
> 
> sebb pushed a commit to branch master
> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator.git
> 
> 
> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
> new 55ed423  Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
> 55ed423 is described below
> 
> commit 55ed4232cb0bba9ec0ffe5d6647f21aeae45700c
> Author: Sebb 
> AuthorDate: Thu Mar 21 16:55:17 2019 +
> 
>Add titles to columns; repeat at end of table
> ---
> pages/clutch/index.ad | 57 +++
> 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/pages/clutch/index.ad b/pages/clutch/index.ad
> index d84827a..9132608 100644
> --- a/pages/clutch/index.ad
> +++ b/pages/clutch/index.ad
> @@ -33,27 +33,48 @@ include::_includes/clutchmy.ad[]
> |===
> |link:#h-project[Podling]
> |link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
> -|link:#h-startdate[A]
> -|link:#h-elapseddays[B]
> -|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C]
> -|link:#h-reportinggroup[D]
> -|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E]
> -|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F]
> -|link:#h-statusage[G]
> -|link:#h-statusupdatesounts[H]
> -|link:#h-numbercommitters[I]
> -|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J]
> -|link:#h-hasrepos[K]
> -|link:#h-hastracker[L]
> -|link:#h-hasdevlist[M]
> -|link:#h-hascommitslist[N]
> -|link:#h-haswebsite[O]
> -|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P]
> -|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q]
> -|link:#h-hasrelease[R]
> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,title=Has a Distribution Area]
> +|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q,title=Has Release Signing Keys]
> +|link:#h-hasrelease[R,title=Has a Release in the Distribution Area]
> 
> include::_includes/clutchr.ad[]
> 
> +|link:#h-project[Podling]
> +|link:#h-sponsor[Sponsor]
> +|link:#h-startdate[A,title=Start Date]
> +|link:#h-elapseddays[B,title=Elapsed Days]
> +|link:#h-reportingmonthly[C,title=Reporting Monthly?]
> +|link:#h-reportinggroup[D,title=Reporting Group]
> +|link:#h-hasstatusfile[E,title=Has status file]
> +|link:#h-statusupdatedate[F,title=Status updated]
> +|link:#h-statusage[G,title=Status Age]
> +|link:#h-statusupdatecounts[H,title=Status Update Counts]
> +|link:#h-numbercommitters[I,title=Number of Committers]
> +|link:#h-numbernewcommitters[J,title=Number of New Committers]
> +|link:#h-hasrepos[K,title=Has a Code Repository]
> +|link:#h-hastracker[L,title=Has Issue Tracker]
> +|link:#h-hasdevlist[M,title=Has dev@ List]
> +|link:#h-hascommitslist[N,title=Has commits@ list]
> +|link:#h-haswebsite[O,title=Has Website]
> +|link:#h-hasdistributionarea[P,title=Has a Distribution Area]
> +|link:#h-hassigningkeys[Q,title=Has Release Signing Keys]
> +|link:#h-hasrelease[R,title=Has a Release in the Distribution Area]
> +
> |===
> 
> [[definitions]]
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cvs-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: cvs-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 


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

Add to Wiki ContributorsGroup

[leerho]

Lee Rhodes

Re: [NOTICE] Request to Add New Mentors to Apache SensSoft Podling

[Atri Sharma]

Thanks a ton.

On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 at 9:32 AM, Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> HI,
>
> > I had requested IPMC membership on the private list a while back, please
> > consider the same and add me
>
> Have a little patience please, we need to discuss, vote and give board
> notice on new IPMC members, that may take a week or two.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
> --
Regards,

Atri
Apache Concerted

Re: [NOTICE] Request to Add New Mentors to Apache SensSoft Podling

[Justin Mclean]

HI,

> I had requested IPMC membership on the private list a while back, please
> consider the same and add me

Have a little patience please, we need to discuss, vote and give board notice 
on new IPMC members, that may take a week or two.

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

Re: [NOTICE] Request to Add New Mentors to Apache SensSoft Podling

[Atri Sharma]

I had requested IPMC membership on the private list a while back, please
consider the same and add me

On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 at 8:49 AM, Justin Mclean  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > Mr. Atri Sharma and Mr. Dave Meikle have kindly offered their support as
> mentors of the Apache SensSoft podling.
>
> I’ve added them both to the roster, note however rear currently only Dave
> is an IPMC member, and you need to be an IPMC member to be an official
> mentor.
>
> >  We want to make sure we’re adopting the appropriate steps.
>
> Other than adding to the roster there’s no formal steps.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
> --
Regards,

Atri
Apache Concerted

Re: [NOTICE] Request to Add New Mentors to Apache SensSoft Podling

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Mr. Atri Sharma and Mr. Dave Meikle have kindly offered their support as 
> mentors of the Apache SensSoft podling.

I’ve added them both to the roster, note however rear currently only Dave is an 
IPMC member, and you need to be an IPMC member to be an official mentor.

>  We want to make sure we’re adopting the appropriate steps. 

Other than adding to the roster there’s no formal steps.

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

[NOTICE] Request to Add New Mentors to Apache SensSoft Podling

[Joshua Poore]

Hello!

Mr. Atri Sharma and Mr. Dave Meikle have kindly offered their support as 
mentors of the Apache SensSoft podling. We would like to begin the process of 
onboarding them. 

@Justin—can you advise us as to the steps that the existing mentor (@lewis) or 
committers need take (beyond assigning appropriate permissions on JIRA, etc., 
etc.)? We want to make sure we’re adopting the appropriate steps. Your 
assistance would be very much appreciated.

Best,

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

Re: Add

[John D. Ament]

I have added you.  Happy editing.

On Wed, May 2, 2018, 7:26 AM Josh Fischer  wrote:

> I'm sending this to clarify my request.  I am sending this to get write
> access to the apache incubator wiki.  My username is JoshFischer.  Thank
> you for your time.
>
> 2018-05-01 14:37 GMT-05:00 Josh Fischer :
>
> > JoshFischer
> >
>

Re: Add

[Josh Fischer]

I'm sending this to clarify my request.  I am sending this to get write
access to the apache incubator wiki.  My username is JoshFischer.  Thank
you for your time.

2018-05-01 14:37 GMT-05:00 Josh Fischer :

> JoshFischer
>

Re: Clarifying on how to add initial PPMC members

[John D. Ament]

Weird,  the only odd thing now is it looks like both of us added him.
There were no code changes, so no idea.

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 7:53 PM Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> And now it's working!
>
> Justin
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Clarifying on how to add initial PPMC members

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

And now it's working!

Justin

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

Re: Clarifying on how to add initial PPMC members

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Can you please share the username of one of the users that you're having
> problems with?

Try either Kai Herings (kherings) or Mark Keinhörster (keinmark).

Lukas Friedrichsen and Frank Stibane ICLAs has been accepted but don’t have 
apache id’s as yet but they would be next.

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

Re: Clarifying on how to add initial PPMC members

[John D. Ament]

Can you please share the username of one of the users that you're having
problems with?

John

On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 7:09 PM Justin Mclean <justinmcl...@me.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > Did you click the box indicating the notice period expired?
>
> Yes I did and the button are still disabled. I tried in two seperate
> browser to make sure it wasn’t a browser issue as well.
>
> I can add other ASF people as committers but that’s not what I want to do.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Clarifying on how to add initial PPMC members

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Did you click the box indicating the notice period expired?

Yes I did and the button are still disabled. I tried in two seperate browser to 
make sure it wasn’t a browser issue as well.

I can add other ASF people as committers but that’s not what I want to do.

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