Re: [DISCUSS] Kudu incubator proposal

Hi Alex, We don’t have to hear from every author. If we don’t have an ICLA or SGA on file for them, we’ll remove their code from the initial import. BTW, that’s a few steps away. We’re also rehashing stuff that has been discussed many times over, frankly. Cheers, Chris -Original

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote: >... > I don't have incubator stats... nor do I have a good way to measure "most > active" or "most successful" projects in the ASF (seems that itself could > be a 'centithread'-worthy discussion). But a potential proxy

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 4:29 AM, Harbs wrote: >... > FWIW, I personally could swallow using RTC with Git, but I would seriously > have problems with RTC with SVN. > I read this as "RTC sucks, but at least Git makes it suck less." :-) (and yes, Git's features naturally

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:33 AM, Reynold Xin wrote: > Most non-trivial software projects I worked on (paid or un-paid) have RTC > culture. I cannot represent every single project, but in the ones that I'm > closely involved with that use RTC, it is simply part of the culture

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > > > > Nobody is forcing anything. > > > > Personally, I am saying RTC is destructive, and am willing to give every > > podling that message. > > If

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > > Nobody is forcing anything. > > Personally, I am saying RTC is destructive, and am willing to give every > podling that message. If it is truly destructive, SHOULDN'T you/we be trying to force something? And if not,

RE: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

> -Original Message- > From: r...@databricks.com [mailto:r...@databricks.com] On Behalf Of > Reynold Xin > Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2015 22:33 > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...) > [ ... ] [orcmid] > Committers are required to use

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

This kind of underscores my observation that a large part of this debate is driven by source control technologies. RTC seems popular for projects using Git, while CTR seems popular in communities using SVN. RTC is a LOT easier using Git than SVN if the model is branching. FWIW, I personally

Re: [VOTE] TinkerPop 3.1.0-incubating Release

+1 (binding) So far I've checked in the source release: signatures and digests, source releases file layouts, matched git tags and commit ids, incubator suffix and disclaimer, build sources in a clean environment (oracle java 8u66+8u65arm-1~webupd8~1 on debian 64bits). I think Justin already

Re: [VOTE] TinkerPop 3.1.0-incubating Release

> but different copyright years do you need to put anything in NOTICE? From what I’ve seen the answer is no ok - so because we have TinkerPop boilerplate at the top of NOTICE, we can drop others that have that same boilerplate with different copyright years. > HPPC (no notice file) You'd

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:10 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > >> >> P.S. To be clear: I am not a fan of RTC when applied to release.next >> branches. > > I'd appreciate your explanation of this, as "most" CTR

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

> On Nov 22, 2015, at 7:57 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 5:42 AM, Harbs wrote: >> ... > >> If there is a disagreement, it seems to be part semantics, part version >> control technologies (i.e. SVN optimized workflow vs Git optimized

Re: [VOTE] TinkerPop 3.1.0-incubating Release

Hi, >> HPPC (no notice file) > > You'd previously suggested that we assume a standard notice for HPPC and > add copyright but i believe i found that copyright in their source notice > at one point. Up to you/the PPMC I think, INAL but given there's no NOTICE there’s no need to do anything. >

Re: [VOTE] Accept S2Graph into Apache Incubation

+1 non-binding On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:21 PM, moon soo Lee wrote: > +1 non-binding > On 2015년 11월 24일 (화) at 오전 11:55 hongbin ma wrote: > > > +1 non-binding > > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Luke Han wrote: > > > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] S2Graph Incubator Proposal

Stack, I greatly appreciate your reviews. I reflected almost all comments you gave to the proposal. I'll make a vote thread soon. Best regards, Hyunsik On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Hyunsik Choi wrote: > Thank you Stack for your kind work. I just understood. I will

[VOTE] Accept S2Graph into Apache Incubation

Hello folks, Thanks for all the feedback on the S2Graph Proposal. I would like to call for a [VOTE] on S2Graph joining the ASF as an incubation project. The vote is open for at least 72 hours: [ ] +1 accept S2Graph in the Incubator [ ] ±0 [ ] -1 (please give reason) S2Graph provides a

Re: [DISCUSS] S2Graph Incubator Proposal

Good luck! On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Hyunsik Choi wrote: > Stack, > > I greatly appreciate your reviews. I reflected almost all comments you > gave to the proposal. I'll make a vote thread soon. > > Best regards, > Hyunsik > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Hyunsik

Re: [DISCUSS] S2Graph Incubator Proposal

Hi, I just added a ticket describing the benefits of providing Apache TinkerPop support for S2Graph. https://github.com/kakao/s2graph/issues/175 Just some thoughts in case you haven't considered TinkerPop. Good luck, Marko. http://markorodriguez.com On Nov 23, 2015, at 5:35 PM, Stack

Re: [VOTE] Accept S2Graph into Apache Incubation

+1 non-binding On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Luke Han wrote: > +1 non-binding > > > Best Regards! > - > > Luke Han > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Hyunsik Choi wrote: > > > Hello folks, > > > > Thanks for all the feedback on

Re: [VOTE] Accept S2Graph into Apache Incubation

+1 non-binding Best Regards! - Luke Han On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Hyunsik Choi wrote: > Hello folks, > > Thanks for all the feedback on the S2Graph Proposal. > > I would like to call for a [VOTE] on S2Graph joining the ASF as an > incubation

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Greg Stein wrote: > > > > > > Nobody is forcing anything. > > > > > > Personally, I am

RE: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

The suggestion is to add it to the proposal template - that's before incubation starts. -Original Message- From: Niall Pemberton [mailto:niall.pember...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 5:49 PM To: general-incubator Subject: Re: RTC vs CTR (was:

Re: [DISCUSS] S2Graph Incubator Proposal

hi Hyunsik This is Hongbin Ma form Apache Kylin. Before working on Kylin I worked on Microsoft Research Asia's Graph engine "Trinity"( http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/trinity/), mostly on a ansi-like graph query language. My experience makes me very interested in this project.

Re: [VOTE] Accept S2Graph into Apache Incubation

+1 non-binding On 2015년 11월 24일 (화) at 오전 11:55 hongbin ma wrote: > +1 non-binding > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Luke Han wrote: > > > +1 non-binding > > > > > > Best Regards! > > - > > > > Luke Han > > > > On Tue, Nov 24,

Re: [VOTE] Accept S2Graph into Apache Incubation

+1 binding. Thanks! On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:06 PM Byung-Gon Chun wrote: > +1 non-binding > > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:21 PM, moon soo Lee > wrote: > > > +1 non-binding > > On 2015년 11월 24일 (화) at 오전 11:55 hongbin ma >

Re: [DISCUSS] OpenMiracl for Incubation

Hi All, thanks for everyone's feedback and Sterling thank you for graciously coming on board as an additional mentor. I'd like to propose that the proposed Apache OpenMiracl incubation project be renamed to Apache Milagro. A Milagro is a charm that is used to bring about a miracle, so the

Re: [DISCUSS] Kudu incubator proposal

On 11/22/15, 12:51 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" wrote: >If they have code contributions part of >this >code base, that they don’t want included, they can state that. It was my >understanding this code base was Apache License, version 2, beforehand, >thus >we

Re: [DISCUSS] Kudu incubator proposal

Alex, Please re-read my email. As I stated we don’t take code that authors don’t want us to have. So far, we haven’t heard from any of the authors on the incoming Kudu project that that’s the case. If it’s not the case, we go by the license of the project which stipulates how code can be copied,

Re: [DISCUSS] Kudu incubator proposal

On 11/23/15, 8:23 AM, "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" wrote: >Alex, > >Please re-read my email. As I stated we don’t take code that >authors don’t want us to have. So far, we haven’t heard from any of >the authors on the incoming Kudu project that that’s the case. If

Re: [VOTE] TinkerPop 3.1.0-incubating Release

+1 (binding) Passed my usual compliance checks. With regards, Daniel. On 11/23/2015 09:28 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote: > +1 (binding) > > So far I've checked in the source release: signatures and digests, source > releases file layouts, matched git tags and commit ids, incubator suffix > and