Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

What are you referring to, Konstantin? Best regards, Pierre Smits *OFBiz Extensions Marketplace* http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 08:36PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > Does there always have to be

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:38AM, Greg Trasuk wrote: > Hi Daniel: > > Discussion intertwined below… > > Cheers, > > Greg Trasuk > > > On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > > > Hi Incubator folks, > > > > I would like to propose we adopt a mentor

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 01:29AM, Pierre Smits wrote: > What are you referring to, Konstantin? I am referring to the progressives of the world and all "policy frameworks" they are so readily unleashing on everybody because they have an urge to meddle. I am very much agree with Chris and Ross on

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 08:36PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > Does there always have to be an actual problem before we can propose a > policy? must we always be reactive instead of proactive? "We can't just stay on a side and wait, we should do something!" - sounds all too familiar, eh? > Yes, I am in

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

I do not agree with this proposal I will elaborate more later Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:07 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > Hi Incubator folks, > > I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for > incubating podlings: > > - A mentor must not

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Kylin from the Apache Incubator

Maybe the podling should then elaborate on their choice of having it in the request proposal, before it comes to a vote and it is still in. Best regards, Pierre Smits *OFBiz Extensions Marketplace* http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:47 PM, P. Taylor Goetz

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Kylin from the Apache Incubator

Exactly my point. If it's intentional, leave it in, otherwise consider taking it out. As a (very recent) mentor, I see no indication that the Kylin community has plans to deviate. Background: When Storm was incubating I thought that creating bylaws was required, and we did so, for better or

[VOTE] Release Apache AsterixDB 0.8.7-incubating (RC3)

Hi everyone, Please verify and vote on the first release of Apache AsterixDB . This is our first incubating release for this part of the codebase, so as was the case with our Hyracks components, feedback is much appreciated. As was noted in the result and discussion on dev@asterixdb.i.a.o, this

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

Hi, Please find answers below: 1) The main source code on Github wasn't updated for a while. However, the original and main core was written in 2013 and has been open source since then. As we discussed earlier current code base is only starting point for complete development and will be first

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Meaning: proactively trying to doing the right thing, trying to define boundaries before wrongdoing happens, is wrong? Best regards, Pierre Smits *OFBiz Extensions Marketplace* http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Chris Douglas wrote: > Daniel-

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Pierre Smits *OFBiz Extensions Marketplace* http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:31 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > No. Meaning that starting from a place of no-trust in an environment where > trust is critical is wrong. > > Ross > > -Original

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

I have agreed to be a mentor to Concerted and I think it is an interesting idea. I am inclined to vote for it entering the incubator. However since the project has not released any source code yet, there are a couple of questions I'd like to get answered for the record: 1. How many lines of

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

Thanks for clarifying. +1 (binding) Julian On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Atri Sharma wrote: > Hi, > > Please find answers below: > > 1) The main source code on Github wasn't updated for a while. However, the > original and main core was written in 2013 and has been open

RE: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

No. Meaning that starting from a place of no-trust in an environment where trust is critical is wrong. Ross -Original Message- From: Pierre Smits [mailto:pierre.sm...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 2:26 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Kylin from the Apache Incubator

I agree. It’s also worth discussing whether the “tasked with the creation of a set of bylaws” section of the proposal is really needed. My understanding is that that section is not actually necessary, and has proliferated among projects largely due to copying/pasting of other graduation

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Daniel- If you have these concerns about mentors, a TLP proposal, or even an active TLP substantiated only by private information: notify the board via board-private@. That's why it's there. The proposal accuses mentors of selling influence, and acting contrary to the foundation's interest. That

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Kylin from the Apache Incubator

Maybe the podling has a valid reason behind that choice. So let us not chuck that out of the window because of other podlings not paying attention to what they did. Best regards, Pierre Smits *OFBiz Extensions Marketplace* http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 10:42 PM, P.

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) This is exciting!Thanks for putting this together Atri. -- Lars From: Atri Sharma To: general@incubator.apache.org Sent: Friday, October 9, 2015 8:55 AM Subject: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator Hi all, Following the discussion about

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

We should address perceived, and certainly provable, instances of corruption at the Foundation directly, rather than prescribe policy that seeks to prevent future instances as if there is a precedent (but there isn't one here... at least one not spoken aloud, right?). > A mentor must not be

Re: Advice on LICENSE/NOTICE for Shaded Dependencies

On 09/10/2015 19:12, Stephen Mallette wrote: > Hello all, > > I feel like I'm on the verge of getting LICENSE/NOTICE right in all > respects in The TinkerPop. . Seems like there's one piece that's out of > place and could use some advice as I wasn't able to map anything I'd read > in the Apache

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Thank you, Atri. --Chris Nauroth On 10/9/15, 8:55 AM, "Atri Sharma" wrote: >Hi all, > >Following the discussion about Concerted I would like to call a vote for >accepting Concerted as a new incubator project. > >The proposal text is included below, and

Re: Concerted Proposal

Hi All, Proposal is posted for voting. Please vote. Regards, Atri On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Atri Sharma wrote: > Hi All, > > I have posted proposal in Discuss thread. > > Please provide your contributions there. > > Regards, > > Atri > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Daniel Gruno wrote on 10/9/15 11:07 AM: > Hi Incubator folks, > > I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for > incubating podlings: > > - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project or its incubation > status. > - A mentor must not have a vested interest in

[VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

Hi all, Following the discussion about Concerted I would like to call a vote for accepting Concerted as a new incubator project. The proposal text is included below, and available on the wiki: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ConcertedProposal The vote is open for 72 hours: [ ] +1 accept

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Kylin from the Apache Incubator

+1 On 10/7/15, 8:32 AM, "John D. Ament" wrote: >I would be happy to see kylin graduate. >On Oct 7, 2015 11:28, "Luke Han" wrote: > >> The Kylin community and project made significant advances during the >> incubating (from Nov 2014) and >> believes it

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 (non-binding) Amol On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Atri Sharma wrote: > Hi all, > > Following the discussion about Concerted I would like to call a vote for > accepting Concerted as a new incubator project. > > The proposal text is included below, and available on the

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 (non-binding) Pavel 2015-10-09 17:55 GMT+02:00 Atri Sharma : > Hi all, > > Following the discussion about Concerted I would like to call a vote for > accepting Concerted as a new incubator project. > > The proposal text is included below, and available on the wiki: > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Kylin from the Apache Incubator

+1 On 10/9/15, 10:13 AM, "Adunuthula, Seshu" wrote: >+1 > >On 10/7/15, 8:32 AM, "John D. Ament" wrote: > >>I would be happy to see kylin graduate. >>On Oct 7, 2015 11:28, "Luke Han" wrote: >> >>> The Kylin community and project

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Hi, On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or > retiring podlings,.. IMO this is where independence is important. We could require that 3 "organizationally independent" IPMC members

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

What problem does this solve? This proposal lacks context. It implies that mentors are not neutral, and that they are motivated by interests not shared by the ASF. But it does not outline the merits of that belief, neither does it specify how this proposal would address them. Instead of allowing

Advice on LICENSE/NOTICE for Shaded Dependencies

Hello all, I feel like I'm on the verge of getting LICENSE/NOTICE right in all respects in The TinkerPop. . Seems like there's one piece that's out of place and could use some advice as I wasn't able to map anything I'd read in the Apache docs on this topic to my issue. We currently shade

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: >> ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or >> retiring podlings,.. > > IMO this is where

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Does there always have to be an actual problem before we can propose a policy? must we always be reactive instead of proactive? Yes, I am in a way implying that some mentors are, perhaps, not neutral in their work. I will not back it up with specific names or contexts, as I don't want to take a

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Good luck guys! On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Atri Sharma wrote: > Hi all, > > Following the discussion about Concerted I would like to call a vote for > accepting Concerted as a new incubator project. > > The proposal text is included below, and available on the

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 @henry.saputra thanks man On Oct 9, 2015 5:50 PM, "Henry Saputra" wrote: > +1 (binding) > Good luck guys! > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Atri Sharma wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Following the discussion about Concerted I would like to call a vote

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On 10/09/2015 08:02 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: >>> ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Kylin from the Apache Incubator

I am a mentor of Kylin and I believe the project is ready to graduate. They have created a vibrant, open community and are conducting business in the Apache Way. One proviso: Let's complete the name search before starting the IPMC vote. It would be foolish to let that particular cart get in front

[DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Hi Incubator folks, I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for incubating podlings: - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project or its incubation status. - A mentor must not have a vested interest in incubating, graduating or dismantling a podling that goes beyond

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

It seems to me that the negatives of your proposed policy outweigh the positives. Presumably the goal is to prevent mentors from making biased decisions due to conflicts of interest. There are other approaches to solving CoI, such as declaring conflicts of interest and, Apache’s current

RE: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

I'm not sure about this. In the past I've argued that we need mentors who *do* have a personal interest. Those are the ones least likely to be absent during incubation. I do agree that mentors must act in a neutral way. I would hope that if this were not the case then someone would speak up. I

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Hi Daniel: Discussion intertwined below… Cheers, Greg Trasuk > On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:07 AM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > Hi Incubator folks, > > I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for > incubating podlings: > > - A mentor must not be financially