Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Tephra-0.8.0-incubating [rc1]

Hi, > The source code still shows "Copyright © 2015 Cask Data, Inc." notices. Are you sure you are looking at the source release bundle? I can’t see copyright Cask Data anywhere. > The code is still organized in co.cask.tephra... packages. That should be > org.apache.tephra..., right? That a

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Tephra-0.8.0-incubating [rc1]

Hi, +1 binding. Minor issue with LICENSE file. I checked: - name includes incubating - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE is missing license appendix, please raise a JIRA and fix for next release - NOTICE is fine - All source files have headers - No unexpected binary files - Can compile from source

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Tephra-0.8.0-incubating [rc1]

Hmm... The source code still shows "Copyright © 2015 Cask Data, Inc." notices.The code is still organized in co.cask.tephra... packages. That should be org.apache.tephra..., right? There is no NOTICE file, and the LICENSE file only contains the Apache 2.0 license. Is there any 3rd party code

Re: [PROPOSAL] Pony Mail

On 05/21/2016 12:45 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > It does very clearly. > > If you're looking for more mentors, I'd be happy to help (we recommend 3 > mentors for a podling). Granted most of the proposed PPMC qualify as > mentors as well. You are most welcome to add your name to the proposal

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

As we have to add a DISCLAIMER file with incubation details, I would add a DISCLAIMER-LGPL to make it more visible then embedded in the middle of the README.md. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Gino Bustelo wrote: > @shane > > As part of building, we put together a more

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Tephra-0.8.0-incubating [rc1]

+1. Transferring my vote over from the previous vote thread. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:47 PM, Poorna Chandra wrote: > Hi all, > > This is a call for a vote on releasing Apache Tephra 0.8.0-incubating, > release candidate 1. This > is the first release of Tephra. > > Apache

[VOTE] Release of Apache Tephra-0.8.0-incubating [rc1]

Hi all, This is a call for a vote on releasing Apache Tephra 0.8.0-incubating, release candidate 1. This is the first release of Tephra. Apache Tephra community has voted and approved the release. Vote thread:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Pony Mail

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 10:40 PM Daniel Gruno wrote: > On 05/20/2016 04:26 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > Daniel, > > > > I'm a bit curious, what does the proposed plan to gain by going through > > incubation, instead of becoming a TLP directly? > > > > Is it the community

Re: [DISCUSS] A users@ mailing list for Apache Mynewt

Would the new pony mail UI help? https://lists.apache.org/list.html?mynewt.apache.org John On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 4:03 PM James Pace wrote: > Hello. I am participating in the Apache Mynewt project and want to pose a > quick question that might have been brought up

Fwd: [DISCUSS] A users@ mailing list for Apache Mynewt

Hello. I am participating in the Apache Mynewt project and want to pose a quick question that might have been brought up previously… Are there any other ASF-supported alternatives to the current mail archive UI? If there’s a solution that’s been proposed, we’re keen to here; if not, we would be

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

@shane As part of building, we put together a more comprehensive LICENSE and NOTICE file that includes the extra information under https://github.com/apache/incubator-toree/blob/master/etc/legal/LICENSE_extras. The installer of the pip package prints out the LGPL disclaimer during installation.

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

Gino Bustelo wrote on 5/19/16 12:30 PM: ... > In Toree we have an LGPL dependency that is not a simple rip an replace. > The library is JeroMQ and it is a JVM binding to 0MQ. This is THE protocol > layer used in Jupyter between clients and kernels (Toree serves as a > Jupyter kernel). Over the

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Mnemonic-0.1.2-incubating [rc2] (Revised)

+1 (binding) Thanks Justin. Good idea, we will update README.txt. Here is the JIRA ticket filed by Gary to track it. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNEMONIC-51 BTW, below is the build success with mvn -pl '!mnemonic-memory-services/mnemonic-nvml-vmem-service' clean package This is in

RE: [VOTE] Release of Apache Mnemonic-0.1.2-incubating [rc2] (Revised)

Hi Justin, Thanks for your review and advices, we will create a ticket to add that to README for OSX platform, Thanks. Best Regards B.R, +Gary -Original Message- From: Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com] Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 7:37 PM To:

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

Yes this is the other benefit to abstracting an API. You can mock test with the API or provide a drop in replacement if once exists. IE I do not integration tests Java projects using mysql, I use h2 or derby. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Shankar Venkataraman <

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

In addition, if the LGPL (or a less open licensing) dependency makes it hard to set up and run automated tests on an ongoing basis, it does nullify the spirit of the one release doctrine. To honor the doctrine may lead to painful refactoring, but I do think it is essential for Toree to be truly

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

​​The proposal excludes the Template Gallery from inclusion in the initial software grant and sets it up as an issue for the podling to tackle during incubation. "The PredictionIO community also maintains a​ ​Template Gallery, a place to publish and download (free or proprietary) engine templates

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

On 5/20/16, 9:32 AM, "Edward Capriolo" wrote: >Yes if you are using a feature specific to a specific product it is >obvious >even if you wrap cruft around it. however when I see something that uses >"rabbit mq" i generally think to wrap an interface around it so I can

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

Yes if you are using a feature specific to a specific product it is obvious even if you wrap cruft around it. however when I see something that uses "rabbit mq" i generally think to wrap an interface around it so I can replace with Apache Kafka :).I am wondering if the same be done here. On Fri,

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

+1 for the current committer list, but please, anyone interested get familiar, we will need more help soon! Also I’d like to bring up the template gallery again. Plugins may be problematic in other projects but pio does nothing of interest *without* a template. There are some examples in the

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

On 5/20/16, 8:57 AM, "Edward Capriolo" wrote: >" You could argue that it makes the dependency optional" >Yes that is what I am saying. Like in a JDBC application you may be >connecting to postgres or mysql you are not concerned how those are >licensed because you are

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

Thanks! That takes care of my concerns as well. Lets go ahead with the vote on the current proposal. Thanks, Roman. On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Suneel Marthi wrote: > The current list is good to go and includes all (both present and former) > PIO folks. > I am fine with

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

" You could argue that it makes the dependency optional" Yes that is what I am saying. Like in a JDBC application you may be connecting to postgres or mysql you are not concerned how those are licensed because you are linked to the shim/driver. You could even bring in the Microsoft SQL server as a

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

The current list is good to go and includes all (both present and former) PIO folks. I am fine with going for Voting with the present list. +1 On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > The current list of initial committers was that provided me by the >

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

The current list of initial committers was that provided me by the PredictionIO folks so I have every reason to believe they all have a stake at entering incubation. It's totally fine with me if we stick to that list. I am just trying to facilitate the fairest process possible. On Friday, May

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Ranger 0.5.3 (incubating)

Thank you so much Justin. I’ll do the below. 1] Initiate another RC for 0.5.3. 2] Track these issues in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RANGER-964 and target to address in 0.6.0 Regarding your question on [5] and [6] below, I believe these files are covered under jquery globalize

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Suneel Marthi wrote: > I definitely have concerns about too many folks becoming initial committers > and bringing their own corporate agendas to this project. > > I suggest that first we vote PIO into incubator then bring in those less >

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

On 5/20/16, 7:23 AM, "Edward Capriolo" wrote: >Would it be acceptable to develop a shim layer toree can link to that and >the provider is dropped in at runtime like the jdbc interface? AIUI, a shim doesn't break the dependency chain. You could argue that it makes the

Re: [DISCUSS] PredictionIO incubation proposal

It’s great to see such interest and I’m sure the rest of the podling would agree that the more the better. I also agree with Suneel, people who know PIO should be given a short bit of time to get organized before we do the desired expansion. There will be lots of room to contribute, in any

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Mnemonic-0.1.2-incubating [rc2] (Revised)

I had to use mvn -pl '!mnemonic-memory-services/mnemonic-nvml-vmem-service,!mnemonic-memory-services/mnemonic-pmalloc-service' clean install on my mac (guess I didn't have mvem and pmalloc installed?) Patrick On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 7:36 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: >

Re: Toree's One Release Constraint

Would it be acceptable to develop a shim layer toree can link to that and the provider is dropped in at runtime like the jdbc interface? On Thursday, May 19, 2016, Craig Russell wrote: > I found Jim’s message from February 24 in which he says that for one > release,

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Mnemonic-0.1.2-incubating [rc2] (Revised)

looks good, thanks. -- View this message in context: http://apache-incubator-general.996316.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-of-Apache-Mnemonic-0-1-2-incubating-rc2-Revised-tp49651p49679.html Sent from the Apache Incubator - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [DISCUSS] CarbonData incubation proposal

Hi Julian Hyde, Yes, you are correct, thanks for pointing out this. Actually in early days of CarbonData project, it is inspired by Mondarin. Mondarin is a great OLAP project that we have learned much from. The code you are refering to, "CarbonDef.java, DimensionType.java, LevelType.java" I

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CommonsRDF 0.2.0-incubating RC3

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 4:26 AM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > > @Justin is this the equivalent of a PPMC throwing you a freebie? :-) > > They didn't need to be added to my “owe me a beer” list :-) > Because the beer has been already paid in Vancouver ;-) Thanks, Justin for

Re: [DISCUSS] CarbonData incubation proposal

Hi Julien Le Dem, I am one of the developers in CarbonData project. Thanks for pointing out this issue. Actually, we are in a process of rapid development of this new file format and still missed proper documentation by now. CarbonData's goal is a columnar file format that can be used to