Hi Alexei,
Chukwa started before Flume and Kafka started. Flume community has
flourish with Cloudera behind it. In my experience Flume has been more
fluid, and Chukwa has been more solid. Chukwa can't swim in flume 1.2
branch because flume is becoming more like Chukwa. Unfortunately, most of
Hi all,
Question: how do we go about discouraging it then? Do we need a vote
to modify the content of:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing#md5
I am fine with a change of the format. But at the moment we (Celix) still
have a pending release. Seeing that many other project use
On Wednesday, November 28, 2012, Greg Reddin wrote:
...What difference does it make to
the ASF if a project is very small or very slow?...
IMO, as long as there's three or more active PMC members who react when
needed, and provide the quarterly board reports, a small/slow project is
fine and
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 28, 2012, Greg Reddin wrote:
...What difference does it make to
the ASF if a project is very small or very slow?...
IMO, as long as there's three or more active PMC members who react
On 29 November 2012 08:56, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.orgwrote:
On Wednesday, November 28, 2012, Greg Reddin wrote:
...What difference does it make to
the ASF if a project is very small or very slow?...
IMO, as long as there's three or more active PMC members who react when
On Monday, November 26, 2012, Andy Seaborne wrote:
...One of the mentors is not yet formally a member of IPMC so
we're waiting until we have three formal mentors before calling
the proposal vote
IMO you can go forward with the vote and indicate that having Fabian as a
mentor is pending
Hi there,
Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta
proposal:
Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal:
[ ] +1 Accept Marmotta into the Apache Incubator
[ ] +0 Indifferent to the acceptance of Marmotta
[ ] -1 Do not accept the
+1 (binding)
On 29 November 2012 11:28, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
Hi there,
Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta
proposal:
Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal:
[ ] +1 Accept Marmotta into the Apache
+1 (unbinding since I am not yet an IPMC member)
2012/11/29 Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com
+1 (binding)
On 29 November 2012 11:28, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
Hi there,
Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta
proposal:
Please
+1 binding
Regards,
Alan
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal:
[ ] +1 Accept Marmotta into the Apache Incubator
[ ] +0 Indifferent to the acceptance of Marmotta
[ ] -1 Do not accept the Marmotta
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
...Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal...
+1 with a small caveat:
... = Nominated Mentors
Fabian Christ (fchrist at apache dot org)...
Fabian is not currently a member of the
On Nov 29, 2012, at 1:14 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 29 November 2012 08:56, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.orgwrote:
On Wednesday, November 28, 2012, Greg Reddin wrote:
...What difference does it make to
the ASF if a project is very small or very slow?...
IMO, as long as there's
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal:
+1 (binding)
Best Regards,
Nandana
+1 binding
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:28 AM, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
Hi there,
Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta
proposal:
Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal:
[ ] +1 Accept
+1
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
+1 binding
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:28 AM, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
Hi there,
Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta
proposal:
Please cast your
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
... Would you also add the three or more active PMC members requirement? What
constitutes active?...
IMO the bare minimum is being able to find three PMC members to vote
on things when needed.
Once a project gets below
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
... Would you also add the three or more active PMC members requirement?
What constitutes active?...
IMO the bare minimum is being able to find three PMC
http://www.apache.org/dev/infra-contact#requesting-graduation
outlines the jira tickets infra would like to see when a project
requests resources migration at TLP graduation. The biggest change is
that DNS/website/mailinglists are handled by 1 ticket.
Some caveats not documented there are:
-
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 6:39 AM, Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.comwrote:
+1
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net
wrote:
+1 binding
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:28 AM, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
Hi there,
+1 (binding).
Cheers,
Chris
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
Hi there,
Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta
proposal:
Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal:
[ ] +1 Accept Marmotta into the Apache
On 29 November 2012 14:59, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com
wrote:
... Would you also add the three or more active PMC members
requirement? What constitutes
On Nov 29, 2012, at 7:45 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 29 November 2012 14:59, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:53 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com
wrote:
... Would you also add the three or
+1 (binding)
Ralph
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
Hi there,
Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta
proposal:
Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal:
[ ] +1 Accept Marmotta into the Apache
+1 (binding)
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote:
+1 (binding)
Ralph
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote:
Hi there,
Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta
proposal:
Please cast your votes on
On 29 November 2012 21:28, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote:
== Relationships with Other Apache Projects
Although current RDF/SPARQL support in LMF is build on top of OpenRDF Sesame
API, Marmotta is closely related to many Apache projects, such as Stanbol,
Jena and Any23. See “Alignment”
On 29/11/12 14:53, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Alan Cabrera l...@toolazydogs.com wrote:
... Would you also add the three or more active PMC members requirement? What
constitutes active?...
IMO the bare minimum is being able to find three PMC members to vote
Hard cases make bad law. The rough parameters of the recent 'small
graduates' was that they had around 5 initial PMC members, and some
detectable evidence that all of them were in the reasonably regular
habit of contributing code, let alone voting for releases. If we
insist on testing the absolute
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.comwrote:
Apache Nuvem will define an open application programming interface
for common cloud application services, allowing applications to be
easily ported across the most popular cloud platforms. It is
currently composed of
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.comwrote:
Apache Nuvem will define an open application programming interface
for common cloud application services, allowing applications to be
easily ported across the most popular cloud platforms. It is
currently composed of
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.comwrote:
The Apache Wink project entered incubator in May of 2009. Since then
it has grown the community in users, committers and PPMC members,
made significant improvements to the project codebase and completed
many releases
On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.comwrote:
The Apache Wink project entered incubator in May of 2009. Since then
it has grown the community in users, committers and PPMC members,
made significant improvements to the project codebase and completed
many releases
Just trying to clarify, based on [1] it seems that when a project is
graduating into an existing TLP, once the IPMC vote is done, there is no
need to seek Board approval and the hand-over and infrastructure tasks can
start happening.
Is that the correct understanding ?
[1]
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.comwrote:
Apache Nuvem will define an open application programming interface
for common cloud application services, allowing applications to be
easily
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.comwrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:41 PM, Luciano Resende luckbr1...@gmail.com
wrote:
Apache Nuvem will define an open application programming
As per recent email, this is, formally, an act of the IPMC to certify
that the IP is clear and the community good Apache citizens, followed
by an act of the accepting project, and the board expects that the
accepting project will report on the process promptly.
I'm sure various will correct me if
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Alexander Broekhuis
a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote:
I am fine with a change of the format. But at the moment we (Celix) still
have a pending release. Seeing that many other project use different
formats, I personally don't see this as a show stopper for our
+infra
Ping! I would really like this annoyance to be resolved one way or the other.
Could somebody more experienced with Apache web properties answer
the question?
Question: how do we go about discouraging it then? Do we need a vote
Hence my idea to do away with the rule of thumb and stick to at least one
responsible PMC member.
What problem are we trying to avoid by having this activity/diversity boundary?
Regards,
Alan
On Nov 29, 2012, at 4:52 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
Hard cases make bad law. The rough parameters
On Nov 30, 2012, at 3:03 AM, Roman Shaposhnik r...@apache.org wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Alexander Broekhuis
a.broekh...@gmail.com wrote:
I am fine with a change of the format. But at the moment we (Celix) still
have a pending release. Seeing that many other project use
Hi,
I think that would be a fine choice. I'm fine with releasing it as is for
now
+1 (binding).
Thanks! Could you post your vote to the formal release thread as well?
That said -- I'd like to see the next release take into account the
feedback
that has been provided to the project so
Roman Shaposhnik wrote on Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 18:05:15 -0800:
+infra
Ping! I would really like this annoyance to be resolved one way or the other.
Could somebody more experienced with Apache web properties answer
the question?
41 matches
Mail list logo
