IntelliJ license for committers?

I'm aware that IntelliJ has (at least in the past) made licenses available to committers in bona fide open source projects, and I recall they did the same for Spark. I believe I'm using that license now, but it seems to have expired? If anyone knows the status of that (or of any renewals to the

Re: IntelliJ license for committers?

I think they can renew your license. In https://www.jetbrains.com/buy/opensource/?product=idea, you can find "Update Open Source License". On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Sean Owen wrote: > I'm aware that IntelliJ has (at least in the past) made licenses > available to

Re: IntelliJ license for committers?

Thanks, yes I've seen this, though I recall from another project that at some point they said, wait, we already gave your project a license! and I had to track down who had it. I think Josh might be the keeper? Not a big deal, just making sure I didn't miss an update there. On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at

[VOTE] Release Apache Spark 1.6.0 (RC1)

Please vote on releasing the following candidate as Apache Spark version 1.6.0! The vote is open until Saturday, December 5, 2015 at 21:00 UTC and passes if a majority of at least 3 +1 PMC votes are cast. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Spark 1.6.0 [ ] -1 Do not release this package

Re: IntelliJ license for committers?

Yep, I'm the point of contact between us and JetBrains. I forwarded the 2015 license renewal email to the private@ list, so it should be accessible via the archives. I'll go ahead and forward you a copy of our project license, which will have to be renewed in January of next year. On Wed, Dec 2,

When to cut RCs

Moving this to dev -- That's good, that'll help. Technically there's still a Blocker bug: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-12000 The 'race' doesn't matter that much, but release planning remains the real bug-bear here. There are still, for instance, 52 issues targeted at 1.6.0, 42 of

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Spark 1.6.0 (RC1)

-0 If spark-ec2 is still a supported part of the project, then we should update its version lists as new releases are made. 1.5.2 had the same issue. https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/v1.6.0-rc1/ec2/spark_ec2.py#L54-L91 (I guess as part of the 2.0 discussions we should continue to discuss

Re: When to cut RCs

> > Sorry for a second email so soon. I meant to also ask, what keeps the cost > of making an RC high? Can we bring it down with better tooling? > There is a lot of tooling: https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins/view/Spark-Packaging/ Still you have check JIRA, sync with people who have been

Re: When to cut RCs

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Michael Armbrust wrote: > This can be debated, but I explicitly ignored test and documentation issues. > Since the docs are published separately and easy to update, I don't think > its worth further disturbing the release cadence for these

Re: When to cut RCs

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Michael Armbrust > wrote: > >> >>> >> The release is theoretically several weeks behind plan on what's >>> intended to be a fixed release cycle too. This is why

Re: When to cut RCs

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Michael Armbrust wrote: > >> > The release is theoretically several weeks behind plan on what's >> intended to be a fixed release cycle too. This is why I'm not sure why >> today it's suddenly potentially ready for release. >> > > Up until

Re: IntelliJ license for committers?

the private@spark list is only available to PMC members[1]. Could we document somewhere (the IntelliJ section of the wiki[2]?) both the current point of contact and a list of what happens when things get renewed each year? That way we could include either a note that the POC should email the key

Re: IntelliJ license for committers?

Yeah I can see the PMC list as it happens; technically there are committers that aren't PMC / ASF members though, yeah. Josh did update the list when the last one expired, and the current license hasn't expired yet, though it was no longer working for me. It turns out to not be valid for the very

Re: IntelliJ license for committers?

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Reynold Xin wrote: > For IntelliJ I think the free version is sufficient for Spark development. > > And I believe anyone with a @apache.org e-mail address can request their own personal license for InteliJ. That's what I personally did. --

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Spark 1.6.0 (RC1)

I'm going to kick the voting off with a +1 (binding). We ran TPC-DS and most queries are faster than 1.5. We've also ported several production pipelines to 1.6.

[build system] jenkins downtime, thursday 12/10/15 7am PDT

there's Yet Another Jenkins Security Advisory[tm], and a big release to patch it all coming out next wednesday. to that end i will be performing a jenkins update, as well as performing the work to resolve the following jira issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-11255 i will put

Re: When to cut RCs

In terms of advertising to people the status of the release and whether an RC is likely to go out, the best mechanism I can think of is our current mechanism of using JIRA and respecting the semantics of a blocker JIRA. We could do a better job though creating a JIRA dashboard for each release and

Re: Python API for Association Rules

Hi Joseph. Sorry for my fail, I will comment on Jira. Thanks. Caique. 2015-12-02 19:12 GMT-02:00 Joseph Bradley : > If you're working on a feature, please comment on the JIRA first (to avoid > conflicts / duplicate work). Could you please copy what your wrote to the >

Re: Multiplication on decimals in a dataframe query

Not quiet sure whats happening, but its not an issue with multiplication i guess as the following query worked for me: trades.select(trades("price")*9.5).show +-+ |(price * 9.5)| +-+ |199.5| |228.0| |190.0| |199.5| |190.0| |

Re: IntelliJ license for committers?

For IntelliJ I think the free version is sufficient for Spark development. On Thursday, December 3, 2015, Sean Owen wrote: > Yeah I can see the PMC list as it happens; technically there are > committers that aren't PMC / ASF members though, yeah. Josh did update > the list

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Spark 1.6.0 (RC1)

I tried to run test suite and encountered the following: http://pastebin.com/DPnwMGrm FYI On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:39 PM, Nicholas Chammas < nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: > -0 > > If spark-ec2 is still a supported part of the project, then we should > update its version lists as new

Python API for Association Rules

Hello everyone! I'm developing to the Python API for association rules ( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-8855), but I found a doubt. Following the description of the issue, it says that a important method is " *FPGrowthModel.generateAssociationRules()*", of course. However, is not

Re: When to cut RCs

Thanks for bringing this up Sean. I think we are all happy to adopt concrete suggestions to make the release process more transparent, including pinging the list before kicking off the release build. Technically there's still a Blocker bug: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-12000

Re: Python API for Association Rules

If you're working on a feature, please comment on the JIRA first (to avoid conflicts / duplicate work). Could you please copy what your wrote to the JIRA to discuss there? Thanks, Joseph On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:51 AM, caiquermarques95 wrote: > Hello everyone! >

Re: query on SVD++

You means the SVDPlusPlus in GraphX? If you want to use SVD++ to train CF model, I recommend you to use ALS which is more efficiency and has python interface. 2015-12-02 11:21 GMT+08:00 张志强(旺轩) : > Hi All, > > > > I came across the SVD++ algorithm implementation in

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Spark 1.6.0 (RC1)

+1 Ran through test suite (minus docker-integration-tests) which passed. Overall experience was much better compared with some of the prior RC's. [INFO] Spark Project External Kafka ... SUCCESS [ 53.956 s] [INFO] Spark Project Examples . SUCCESS