Check out this guide that shows how to conform to the Apache website
policies:
https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs#introduction
Cheers,
Chris
On 8/4/17, 11:20 AM, "Ly Nguyen" wrote:
Hi Isabelle,
As Mu mentioned we are in the process of transferring our website to
ht
Hi Isabelle,
As Mu mentioned we are in the process of transferring our website to
http://mxnet.incubator.apache.org so nothing there is official. Thank you
for the note about the disclaimer about be an incubator though.
Is this the writing that we need to add?:
"Apache MXNet (incubating) is an e
I suggest using the current logo on http://mxnet.io
We on the way to transfer the website to http://mxnet.incubator.apache.org
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 2:35 AM, Isabel Drost-Fromm
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently in the process of creating a slide deck and wanted to use the
> mxnet logo as part of
>
> Could you provide an example that provides a likely (imaginary if you'd
> like) candidate? Mu's a pretty bad example for a new committer :) From the
> attached doc I walk away thinking that I need to contribute for 2 years
> before I can become a committer.
For example, I think https://github
My experience from the existing open-source project we have is that the
developers are willing to contribute back as long as the software they use
are hold up to a standard.
I do not meant to say that the contributions of the language,
documentations and others do not count as contributions to the
FYI here is the comitter checklist from Apache Mesos
http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/committer-candidate-checklist/
which I mainly adopted from
Tianqi
On Fri, Aug 4, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Madan Jampani
wrote:
> There is a middle ground here. Instead of saying someone either has full
> c
There is a middle ground here. Instead of saying someone either has full
committer privileges or zero, an alternative is to have scope of ownership
start small and localized to modules or source folders where their primary
contributions currently lie. For example, there are folks who contributed
fu
There are trade-offs. On one side, a small group of "core" committers who
understands the whole picture makes the project move swiftly and safely. On
the other side, the reward of becoming committer is really important to
encourage more contributors. I think Tianqi's proposal gives a good
criterion
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:27:16PM +0100, Chiyuan Zhang wrote:
> Suppose we lower the standard or completely remove the formal standard for
> committers, then we could probably be able to get more committers from the
> first type. But that might not necessarily be good to us
Can you elaborate your
Hi all, just want to share my bits. I like the idea of formalizing the
committer proposal mechanism. The actual standard for what count as good
enough for a committer could be discussed.
I think the worrying of not being able to recruit new committers might not
be a serious problem. I am thinking
Hi,
I'm currently in the process of creating a slide deck and wanted to use the
mxnet logo as part of that presentation.
So I want ahead and opened
http://mxnet.incubator.apache.org
I found a directory listing including a test directory. Is that expected?
Clicking on the "test" directory opene
On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 12:42:12AM -0700, Henri Yandell wrote:
> I worry that it creates a high barrier to entry.
+1 from my side to that worry.
Isabel
I worry that it creates a high barrier to entry.
It's a far more common pattern for a project to do poorly at recruiting new
committers, than it is for one to recruit too many.
Could you provide an example that provides a likely (imaginary if you'd
like) candidate? Mu's a pretty bad example for a
13 matches
Mail list logo
