On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
>...
> > To be clear: it was emailed to the Board on Feb 28. ... so we technically
> > "have" it. But it does need to be in the agenda before it is "official".
>
> Sorry about that, I did a qui
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, John D. Ament
>> wrote:
>> > * Graduations
>> >
>> > The board has motions for the following:
>> >
>> > - Sentry
>>
>> Not... yet. :-)
>>
>> Does somebody
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
> > * Graduations
> >
> > The board has motions for the following:
> >
> > - Sentry
>
> Not... yet. :-)
>
> Does somebody intend to post this to the agenda?
>
To be clear: it was emaile
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 1:24 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> * Graduations
>
> The board has motions for the following:
>
> - Sentry
Not... yet. :-)
Does somebody intend to post this to the agenda?
- Sam Ruby
-
To unsubscribe,
As an ASF Member, you should have karma.
... and I see you discovered that, and already committed the report :-)
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 7:09 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> its generally preferable to just wait until next month, to give others time
> to review.
>
> With that said, it looks like Atla
On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 5:38 PM, Craig Russell wrote:
>
>>> Agreed. Sebb's recommendation, AIUI, was to simply mention in LICENSE
>>> that there is a non-ASF AL bundle without copying the entire LICENSE.
>
> That’s what I was objecting to. LICENSE is for licenses. If notice is
> required, then us
its generally preferable to just wait until next month, to give others time
to review.
With that said, it looks like Atlas is in. Can someone w/ proper karma
submit the report?
John
On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 2:21 PM Seetharam Venkatesh
wrote:
> I'm adding the report for Apache Atlas now, sorry f
Hi,
+1 on the assumption that future release will fix up the header situation
I checked:
- signatures good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE is missing some BSD licensed software
- NOTICE contains too many copyright lines, copyright lines should not be in
NOTICE unless they are from relocated header
Hi,
The voting period is now closed. The vote passes with:
3 binding +1s (Todd L, Michael S, Justin M)
0 binding -1s
Thanks to everyone who tried the release and voted. Looks like we have a
few more license-related things to tweak, we'll try to get that done for
0.8.0 (which I'm RMing) in April