I'm closing the vote as 72 hours passed and required number of votes are
received. Closing it on behalf of Jaideep as he is OOO.
Thanks all for taking time to vote.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Justin Mclean justinmcl...@me.com wrote:
Hi,
Those are files required for binary
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Chris Douglas cdoug...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org
wrote:
As long as there's a human being in the loop reviewing what's
Chris:
We've discussed Crucible in the past. (There's a ticket or two for it in Jira).
We've talked with some folks who run it, who tell us it's pretty
sluggish for environments a fraction of the size of the ASF.
That said - the other issue is that we have 200 projects. There is
very little
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Jochen Wiedmann
jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 5:56 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
We've explored gerrit 2-3 times in the past 24 months. We have seen
several projects request it over the years. As I've mentioned
elsewhere in
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 8:37 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Hi Till,
We should probably move this discussion on to the
d...@asterixdb.incubator.apache.org list.
In short, we shouldn’t have situations in which there are contributors
who contributions are
I understand that git is a DVCS, but by mirroring the commit content
from one repo to the ASF (albeit via a committer middleman), we
largely make the push records[1] pointless.
The push logs are intended to determine the committer either who
authored the contribution or is taking
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Chris Hillery chill...@hillery.land wrote:
I feel sure that
with an ASF-hosted Gerrit, we wouldn't be able to install any hooks or
plugins, or manage permissions, or anything like that in the way that we
find useful.
Not initially, to be sure. But in the
1. People are not clearly contributing to Apache AsterixDB when
submitting a patch via Gerrit at UCI.edu. Think about Section 5 of
ASLv2.
Then what are they submitting a patch for review to, exactly?
2. The ASF has no record of any contributions that are happening on
the Gerrit instance at
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 5:56 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
We've explored gerrit 2-3 times in the past 24 months. We have seen
several projects request it over the years. As I've mentioned
elsewhere in this thread, our most recent exploration was in December,
and there are a number of
David-
In another conversation, you mentioned Crucible [1] as another tool
for code reviews. Is that a viable option?
Has anyone on the list had any experience using it? -C
[1] https://www.atlassian.com/software/crucible/overview/
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:56 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Ian Maxon ima...@uci.edu wrote:
Then what are they submitting a patch for review to, exactly?
That is the question, indeed. And, please, keep in mind that the
answer must satisfy not a humble developer with no red tape in mind,
but a lawyer.
Second, Gerrit
That is the question, indeed. And, please, keep in mind that the
answer must satisfy not a humble developer with no red tape in mind,
but a lawyer.
I guess there's some legal issue I'm ignorant of here then. How would
one submit a patch, without cloning from the official mirror, and
hence
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org
wrote:
IIRC, the problem with Gerrit workflow is that actually
pushes into the repo are actually done by the bot.
That's how we (the Asterix project) had things set up, but it isn't a
requirement of Gerrit. In fact we had
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 2:04 AM, Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Chris Hillery chill...@hillery.land
wrote:
I feel sure that
with an ASF-hosted Gerrit, we wouldn't be able to install any hooks or
plugins, or manage permissions, or
I've used crucible. It's horrible. And it comes from Atlassian, which
means that infra@ is predisposed against it, as their general feeling
is that the Atlassian products are very heavy.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
The legal issue at hand is that one must reasonably assume that the
contributor offers his patch with an implicit license to the ASF for
distribution under the terms of the ASL 2.
For example, if you add a patch to a Jira issue, then there is a
select box, which allows to express consent to
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Ian Maxon ima...@uci.edu wrote:
2. The ASF has no record of any contributions that are happening on
the Gerrit instance at UCI, until a committer decides to push code to
the ASF repo.
I'm afraid I don't understand this point. How is this different than
any
Got it, thanks.
I’m CC’ing d...@asterixdb.incubator.apache.org.
Till, others: is David’s summarization below accurate?
Anything to respond here?
Thanks,
Chris
++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Chief Architect
Instrument Software and
+1
On Jul 15, 2015, at 9:05 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
I've used crucible. It's horrible. And it comes from Atlassian, which
means that infra@ is predisposed against it, as their general feeling
is that the Atlassian products are very heavy.
In Git (and I'd presume any Git-like DVCS) anything but the push logs
can be spoofed. Having a record of who actually pushed to the repo
is one of the requirement from ASF's standpoint to track chain of custody
for the code that lands in out projects.
Understood. That's the very reason why we
On Jul 16, 2015, at 12:25 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Hi Folks,
Can someone clarify in simple terms what the issue is here?
There's a few issues Chris:
Let me try to describe
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Till Westmann ti...@apache.org wrote:
On Jul 15, 2015, at 10:02 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Ian Maxon ima...@uci.edu wrote:
2. The ASF has no record of any contributions that are happening on
the Gerrit
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote:
As long as there's a human being in the loop reviewing what's going into the
repo I don't think I've got any issues with the process.
The ASF needs to establish provenance. It can't do that if a committer
pushes code
On Jul 16, 2015, at 1:21 AM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Till Westmann ti...@apache.org
mailto:ti...@apache.org wrote:
On Jul 15, 2015, at 10:02 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Ian
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Chris Douglas cdoug...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org
wrote:
As long as there's a human being in the loop reviewing what's going into the
repo I don't think I've got any issues with the process.
The
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Till Westmann ti...@apache.org wrote:
1) I think that we didn’t ask for an ASF hosted instance. But I also think
that
David’s concern that the absence of the service would disrupt the
development of AsterixDB is valid. And thus it might make sense not to rely
To meet this, do we simply need the change proposals in Gerrit (i.e.
pull requests) to have their patch contents mirrored to a proper ASF
mailing list?
- Ian
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Chris Douglas cdoug...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Roman Shaposhnik
+1. This is basically how I see it as well.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Till Westmann ti...@apache.org wrote:
On Jul 16, 2015, at 12:25 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Hi Folks,
Can
Hi Till,
We should probably move this discussion on to the
d...@asterixdb.incubator.apache.org list.
In short, we shouldn’t have situations in which there are contributors
who contributions are “shepherded in” by Apache AsterixDB Incubating
PPMC members whose contributions have an indirect
Hi Folks,
Can someone clarify in simple terms what the issue is here?
I’m sorry I’m just catching up on this thread, but I want to make
sure the podling community for AsterixDB is being supported.
Cheers,
Chris
++
Chris Mattmann,
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Hi Folks,
Can someone clarify in simple terms what the issue is here?
There's a few issues Chris:
1. Contributions are being submitted, discussed, and accepted
externally. No record of the
Thanks Justin for bringing up issues on the candidate. Responses in-line.
Minor issues:
- Any reason why are these file included in the source release?
apache-lens-2.2.0-beta-incubating/bin-dist-files/LICENSE-GPLv3
apache-lens-2.2.0-beta-incubating/bin-dist-files/LICENSE-LGPL
+1 (binding), where so far I've checked:
* signatures and digests
* source releases file layouts
* matched git tags and commit ids
* incubator suffix and disclaimer
* NOTICE and LICENSE files
* build sources in a clean environment (openjdk7, maven 3, debian 64bits)
As Justin commented, is
Hi,
Those are files required for binary distribution LICENSE files. Some of
the libraries included in binary distribution are dual licensed along with
GPL.
And I assume you ‘re not using the GPL license version :-)
AFAIK, I have verified all the content wrt licenses and the NOTICE is fine.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Ian Maxon ima...@uci.edu wrote:
I guess there's some legal issue I'm ignorant of here then. How would
one submit a patch, without cloning from the official mirror, and
hence becoming just as aware of ASF involvement as they would
otherwise?
The legal issue
Hello!
The Apache Ignite PPMC has voted to release Apache Ignite 1.3.0-incubating.
The vote was based on the release candidate and thread described below.
We now request the IPMC to vote on this release.
Apache Ignite 1.3.0 release (RC2) has been accepted with 7 votes for (1
binding vote):
36 matches
Mail list logo
