Motivation:
Some podlings want or need feedback on their releases before they are ready
to make official Apache releases. They want to discuss releases that are
not yet ready for a VOTE, or that they are not sure they are ready for a
vote. They may wish to make an early release outside of the
+1.
I reviewed the diff with the RC2 that I approved, no concerns with anything
added.
Cc'ing other mentors.
Hen
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:45 AM Piyush Ghai wrote:
> Dear community,
>
> This is a call for releasing Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.4.0, release
> candidate RC3.
>
> Apache MXNet
Changing my vote to +1 (binding)
I found the reason for the failing tests on Mac and Windows ... the root cause
was the different locale and the way numeric values are encoded.
In Germany we separate the 1000s with "." and the decimal part with "," and in
the US it's the opposite way. If I
Done. Sorry for that oversight.
Kenn
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:01 PM lee...@gmail.com wrote:
> As primary author, can I be given the ability to directly edit?
> On 2019/02/26 05:37:22, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> > It isn't too much work, so I've done it:
> >
As primary author, can I be given the ability to directly edit?
On 2019/02/26 05:37:22, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> It isn't too much work, so I've done it:
> https://s.apache.org/datasketches-proposal-draft
>
> Kenn
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:31 PM leerho wrote:
>
> > Yes, I thought of
Hi Dave,
IMO, the Incubator is the "welcome wagon". Unfortunately, it often greets new
neighbors with a huge list of policies which is not welcoming. That makes the
incubator more iike a bad Homeowner's Association from a movie. Or maybe a
Boot Camp where only the tough survive and everyone
Thank you!
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:37 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> It isn't too much work, so I've done it:
> https://s.apache.org/datasketches-proposal-draft
>
> Kenn
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:31 PM leerho wrote:
>
> > Yes, I thought of that. But it’s not like I’m being overwhelmed
It isn't too much work, so I've done it:
https://s.apache.org/datasketches-proposal-draft
Kenn
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:31 PM leerho wrote:
> Yes, I thought of that. But it’s not like I’m being overwhelmed with
> requests to comment ... so far it has been only 3 or 4, and the requested
>
Yes, I thought of that. But it’s not like I’m being overwhelmed with
requests to comment ... so far it has been only 3 or 4, and the requested
changes have been minor. I’m assuming that if there are no more
substantive changes after this week that the document would be moved to the
wiki archive,
You could use a Google account that is not under Yahoo’s control, then let
anyone in the world add a comment, maybe.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 3:26 PM leerho wrote:
> Ken,
> Yahoo does not allow me to create a shared link outside our company, except
> to individual email addresses. So attempting
Hi Mick,
I appreciate your taking time to document what you have experienced in the
incubator.
Apologies if these comments cross other discussions. It's hard to keep track of
all the threads that have forked from the original discussion.
> On Feb 24, 2019, at 4:35 PM, Mick Semb Wever wrote:
Adding individuals seems to be working. I was able to add k...@apache.org
successfully, and he successfully added a comment. Casual readers can get
the gist from the text version I inserted into this thread. Those that
wish to make comments make a request via the link and I will add them.
Will
Should we move the proposal to the incubator wiki then?
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 15:26 leerho wrote:
> Ken,
> Yahoo does not allow me to create a shared link outside our company, except
> to individual email addresses. So attempting to share it to the email
> general@incubator.apache.org may
Ken,
Yahoo does not allow me to create a shared link outside our company, except
to individual email addresses. So attempting to share it to the email
general@incubator.apache.org may not work. Nonetheless, several
individuals were able to request access using their individual email
accounts and
I could not access that document. I suggest you need to turn on link
sharing.
Kenn
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 12:00 PM lee...@gmail.com wrote:
> Try this link:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19JKevzFQNcaLA51LFLUlP1hzdFDW7oDJrJO8N6weDv8/edit?usp=sharing
>
>
> On 2019/02/25 05:55:50, leerho
As your suggestion may come up again, I have addressed it by adding a small
section to the proposal itself (in the Google Doc).
On 2019/02/25 17:36:31, Ted Dunning wrote:
> There is also the general question of whether it is better to be a
> top-level project or to become a contribution to
Hi,
I can also point to a few podlings that have jars in their source releases but
these don’t have any real code in them.The exceptions mentioned in this thread
are rare across the 250 top level and incubating projects we have and have been
carefully considered. There’s not a single instance
Try this link:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/19JKevzFQNcaLA51LFLUlP1hzdFDW7oDJrJO8N6weDv8/edit?usp=sharing
On 2019/02/25 05:55:50, leerho wrote:
> Yes I will try that tomorrow.
>
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 7:34 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>
> > Can you share the Google doc with the
Hi -
There has been mentions about lack of documentation, not being able to find
documentation, not being responsible for a policy, and not including the
rationale for a policy.
This morning I remembered something that happened some 49 years ago when I was
a child and we moved to the suburbs
Hi -
I agree with what Myrle wrote I wanted to focus on this paragraph which I think
describes one of the major issues with the IPMC.
> On Feb 25, 2019, at 3:03 AM, Myrle Krantz wrote:
>
> Also, our mentors were not always the most active, so it would have been
> impossible for us to get a
The vote for accepting "Cava" into the Apache Incubator passes* with 8
binding +1 votes, 7 non-binding +1 votes and no other votes.
Thanks for voting!
8 binding +1 votes:
Kevin A. McGrail
Dave Fisher
Byung-Gon Chun
Jim Jagielski
Furman Kamaci
.
Michael Wall
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
Gary Wang
7
There is also the general question of whether it is better to be a
top-level project or to become a contribution to commons math.
On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 10:56 PM leerho wrote:
> Yes I will try that tomorrow.
>
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 7:34 PM Kenneth Knowles wrote:
>
> > Can you share the
Hi Mick,
The ASF's official Release Policy lives here:
https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy
The policy text itself is up-to-date and authoritative. (The associated FAQ,
also on that page, does not live up to the same standard.)
On 2019/02/25 09:05:30, "Mick Semb Wever" wrote:
>
Hi Willem,
It will help focus this discussion if you tell us what the binary artifacts are
and why your normal build process doesn't already build them.
Mark and Christopher described a couple of possible binary files and how to
handle them.
But it would be really useful for you to tell us
Hey all,
We need another talk for the "Project Shark Tank" track at the Apache
Roadshow: Chicago.
If anyone would like to visit Chicago and get some spotlight time on their
favorite project, please submit a talk asap at
https://www.apachecon.com/chiroadshow19/cfp
Thanks!
tg
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 3:28 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> On 25/02/2019 14:15, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:35 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
> >>
> >> On 23/02/2019 06:18, Willem Jiang wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I just have a question about the Binary jars in the source release.
Dear community,
It will be great if members can test the release and vote.
Thanks,
Piyush
On 2019/02/20 18:45:19, Piyush Ghai wrote:
> Dear community,>
>
> This is a call for releasing Apache MXNet (incubating) 1.4.0, release >
> candidate RC3. >
>
> Apache MXNet (incubating) community
On 25/02/2019 14:15, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:35 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
>>
>> On 23/02/2019 06:18, Willem Jiang wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I just have a question about the Binary jars in the source release.
>>> According the Apache release policy, I cannot find any rule
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:35 AM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
> On 23/02/2019 06:18, Willem Jiang wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just have a question about the Binary jars in the source release.
> > According the Apache release policy, I cannot find any rule about the
> > binary jars cannot be in the source
+1 (binding)
Check the signatures, headers, and build.
I saw some possible improvements (on the features, etc), I will propose
my help directly to the podling.
Regards
JB
On 23/02/2019 01:54, Adrian Cole wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> This is a call for vote to release Apache Zipkin Brave
Hey Mick,
I see some promise in the approach you outline. I'd like to explain the
advantages my project drew from the current system, so that we don't lose
anything important in the process of change. Then I would like to suggest
a refinement of your approach. I'm top posting here, because I'm
+1
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019, 19:54 Adrian Cole wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> This is a call for vote to release Apache Zipkin Brave (incubating)
> for Apache Karaf version 0.1.2
>
> The Apache Zipkin community has voted on and approved a proposal to
> release Apache Zipkin Brave (incubating) for Apache
On 23/02/2019 06:18, Willem Jiang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just have a question about the Binary jars in the source release.
> According the Apache release policy, I cannot find any rule about the
> binary jars cannot be in the source release[1]. If we just have jars
> for testing purposes and those
+1 for Jal
Regards
JB
On 22/02/2019 23:47, Antoine Toulme wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have opened a thread to vote the Cava proposal into the incubator [0].
>
> At the same time, I have engaged with the list on searching a better name for
> the project [1].
>
> Out of this initial thread, we have
I'll chime in, but on the technical front my experience is rather new in the
incubator, i'm still learning.
> Looking at some of the situations we currently have I think we may need
> some more general guidance for incubating projects and making releases
> after just joining the incubator.
35 matches
Mail list logo
