Hi,
> But my proposal to move towards offering early feedback on
> releases works with or without this change.
+1
How do we make podling aware they can do this? Obvious people who follow this
list may know, and we can ask mentors to pass it on to their podling lists, on
document on the
Dave,
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:30 PM Dave Fisher wrote:
> The IPMC could consider some changes to the Incubator rules. (As proposed
> mostly by Roy on private lists.)
>
> Allow the VOTE thread to be only on the dev@ list with 0 or 1 mentor vote
> required. As long as the DISCLAIMER exists
I ran searches for rainbow, sprocket and winch and didn’t find OSS projects
with those names.
I personally would like to vouch for Rainbow. It does fit the whimsical
requirement of Apache project names.
> On Feb 26, 2019, at 3:57 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>
> On 2/26/2019 6:24 PM, Kenneth
+1
And thanks to mentors and IPMC members for helping our release. NOTICE year
was caught in dev@ vote too. Master branch already has the fix [1] and we
promise to fix it in the next release.
-sz
[1]
+1 binding
Verified
- Release files in correct location
- Release files have the word incubating in their name
- Digital signature and hashes correct
- DISCLAIMER file exist
- LICENSE and NOTICE files exists
- LICENSE and NOTICE text correct
- Un-included software dependencies are not mentioned
HI,.
+1 (binding)
I didn’t have time to check all of the licenses so there may be some work
that’s still needed there, but it looks fairly comprehensive.
I checked:
- incubating in name
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE looks OK
- NOTICE need year updating
- No unexpected binary files
- All ASF
Hi,
Sorry but I’m also -1 (binding) as there is a number of issues here, there’s
compiled code in the release, the LICENSE and NOTICE files need some work and
the source files don’t have ASF headers.
It would be good to talk to your mentors about how to fix these issues. This
release check
Hi,
+1 (binding)
I checked:
- incubating in name
- signatures and hashes fine - there’s no issue with the sha hash that I can see
- LICENSE is good
- NOTICE need year updating please update in next release
- No binary files run release
- All files have ASF headers
- No need to compile
Thanks,
Kevin A. McGrail wrote on Tue, 26 Feb 2019 23:57 +00:00:
> Re: Winch, might be a common name and undefendable as a trademark, etc.
> Otherwise, though, I couldn't find much relevant in OSS spaces except a
> company called winch gate.
There's the SIGWINCH signal in terminal applications.
+1 looks good to me
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 3:29 PM Hen wrote:
> +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
Thanks to everyone that participated. The vote to release Apache
Zipkin Brave (incubating) for Apache Karaf version 0.1.2 is now
closed. It passed with 6 (+1 binding) votes and no 0 or -1 votes.
Results:
6 (+1 binding) from 姜宁 Willem Jiang, 吴晟 Sheng Wu, Andriy Redko,
Olivier Lamy, John D. Ament,
Thanks all the help from IPMC. I'm sorry I didn't make it clear enough earlier.
Actually, this question is related to recently release check of Apache
Camel[1]. I just found there are some tests jar in the source kit by
applying what I learned from IPMC. I already submit a quick fix to
Hi Matt,
I’ve gone ahead and added you as a Mentor to OpenWhisk.
Thanks,
Dave
> On Feb 26, 2019, at 1:37 PM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> I'd be interested in helping mentor OpenWhisk. I've reviewed some of
> their releases a while ago, so it's the project I'm most familiar with
> from that list.
It worked. I've updated the shortlink to point to your doc.
Kenn
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 4:02 PM Liang Chen wrote:
> Hi Kenneth
>
> Please try this link :
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_cnesVLtKqPeUYxJvsd_2MTFwgeC1wUqI6cDPCbBRSM/edit#heading=h.97rxea60t2yw
>
> Regards
> Liang
>
>
>
Hi Kenneth
Please try this link :
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_cnesVLtKqPeUYxJvsd_2MTFwgeC1wUqI6cDPCbBRSM/edit#heading=h.97rxea60t2yw
Regards
Liang
Kenneth Knowles wrote
> I could not access that document. I suggest you need to turn on link
> sharing.
>
> Kenn
>
> On Mon, Feb 25,
Hi Justin
You are right, should be "Liang Chen", already updated it.
Justin, could you please help to check my right to create new proposal on
incubator wiki at :
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ProjectProposals
Regards
Liang
Justin Mclean wrote
> Hi,
>
>> Currently only IPMC members can be
On 2/26/2019 6:24 PM, Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> I searched for "Jal" and came up with Japan Air Lines, which is clearly a
> really different field of use.
>
> I also found the Wikipedia article on JAL but was hasty in presuming it
> described a historical language. If it is an active open source
I searched for "Jal" and came up with Japan Air Lines, which is clearly a
really different field of use.
I also found the Wikipedia article on JAL but was hasty in presuming it
described a historical language. If it is an active open source project,
let's not collide.
So I'll change my vote to
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:48 AM Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> 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
Hi,
JAL is also a trademark of Japan Air Lines.
Best,
Gon
On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 8:08 AM Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi -
>
> JAL is built for programming PIC micro controllers and I think that the
> field of use may be different enough. But the question is one for the VP,
> Brand.
>
>
-1 (binding)
The license header for the files are wrong.
It contains extra copyright info: Copyright (c) 2017, EPAM SYSTEMS INC
Please follow the guidelines for the header here:
https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
Thanks,
Henry
On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 4:18 AM Bohdan Hliva
Hi -
JAL is built for programming PIC micro controllers and I think that the field
of use may be different enough. But the question is one for the VP, Brand.
http://justanotherlanguage.org
Regards,
Dave
> On Feb 26, 2019, at 2:33 PM, Kevin A. McGrail wrote:
>
> Thanks Antoine,
>
> I am
+1
I think this proposal could help a lot with how feedback is perceived by
podlings!
On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:51 PM Myrle Krantz wrote:
> 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
>
Thanks Antoine,
I am happy to help and vote but I want to make sure I'm right before we get
to that stage.
I don't know if branding or legal (or press) would oppose the name Jal. My
$0.02 is that if this were a corporate entity, the likelihood for confusion
would be very high with two OSS
I am aware of those uses, but they don’t seem to cross with the domain of the
project.
The suitable name search guide [0] expresses a lot of subtlety about name
uniqueness which gave me this interpretation.
Nevertheless, let’s then reopen the thread:
Would you like to vote for another name in
Antoine,
I hate to throw a wrench in the works but there has been so much traffic
here, I missed that thread. Jal (just another language) is a
programming language:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAL_(compiler) &
http://justanotherlanguage.org/
I don't think it's going to be appropriate for us to
Thanks all.
We have a clear winner with “Jal”, with 4 +1 votes and no votes for other names.
Thank you for your participation!
I will make mention of the result of this consultation on the proposal.
We are now set to open the podling.
Cheers,
Antoine
> On Feb 25, 2019, at 1:38 AM,
Hi,
> Allow the VOTE thread to be only on the dev@ list with 0 or 1 mentor vote
> required. As long as the DISCLAIMER exists then the pooling release is good.
>
> Once completed the podling sends the vote thread to general@ with [REVIEW]
> (or [DISCUSS]). This allows the IPMC to review and
I'd be interested in helping mentor OpenWhisk. I've reviewed some of
their releases a while ago, so it's the project I'm most familiar with
from that list. I've also seen some talks about the project, so I'm
fairly interested in it in general as well.
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 15:17, Justin Mclean
The IPMC could consider some changes to the Incubator rules. (As proposed
mostly by Roy on private lists.)
Allow the VOTE thread to be only on the dev@ list with 0 or 1 mentor vote
required. As long as the DISCLAIMER exists then the pooling release is good.
Once completed the podling sends the
Hi,
Nice idea. JFYI - This already happens, just not in a formal way, as I often
get emails to check podlings releases before they bring them to the IPMC.
> I encourage reviewers to review a release candidate, and vote, as early as
> possible in the 72 hour voting period. I also encourage them
Hi,
> So one way to put these facts next to each other:
> * We have 1 podling that has expressed concerned about too much IPMC
> involvement. (Possibly more who are concerned but unwilling to speak up.)
> * We have 8 podlings that have too little IPMC involvement.
Out of 52 podlings and any
Myrle,
> On Feb 26, 2019, at 12:57 PM, Myrle Krantz wrote:
>
> This is a helpful collection Dave,
>
> So one way to put these facts next to each other:
That’s one way to do it. I found other interesting bits and was going to
present other issues separately.
> * We have 1 podling that has
Hi,
We also have poddling with 3 or more mentors that still don’t get enough votes
to pass releases, but the situation has improved from 6 months ago, when more
than 1/2 of the podlings has less than 3 active mentors. The IPMC has taken
steps to ask inactive mentors to step down and vote in a
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 20:01, Ted Dunning wrote:
>
> Kevin,
>
> Can you explain what checking you did to justify your vote?
>
> This is important so that others can know what has already been done.
IMO the +1 ought to be added to the vote thread, not here.
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:02 AM
This is a helpful collection Dave,
So one way to put these facts next to each other:
* We have 1 podling that has expressed concerned about too much IPMC
involvement. (Possibly more who are concerned but unwilling to speak up.)
* We have 8 podlings that have too little IPMC involvement.
This
This change would be useful.
As a release manager of a podling, the most disheartening thing is latency. The
usual practice is a 72 hour PPMC release vote, followed by a 72 hour IPMC vote,
one of which will cross a weekend, so a negative vote on the last day of the
IPMC vote adds at least a
> On Feb 26, 2019, at 12:32 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
>
> Tamaya should likely be on that list as well.
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019, 15:26 Dave Fisher wrote:
>
>> Hi -
>>
>> I did a review of all 51 podlings via Whimsy and the most recent visible
>> Report.
>>
>> One result was identifying
Tamaya should likely be on that list as well.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019, 15:26 Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi -
>
> I did a review of all 51 podlings via Whimsy and the most recent visible
> Report.
>
> One result was identifying several podlings that need/want additional
> mentors. This email will serve
Hi -
I did a review of all 51 podlings via Whimsy and the most recent visible Report.
One result was identifying several podlings that need/want additional mentors.
This email will serve two purposes.
(1) Confirm whether the list is accurate.
(2) Seek volunteers from the current IPMC. If this
Kevin,
Can you explain what checking you did to justify your vote?
This is important so that others can know what has already been done.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 8:02 AM Kevin A. McGrail
wrote:
> On 2/26/2019 8:20 AM, David P Grove wrote:
> >
> > Or in the case of the current OpenWhisk
Hi Makoto,
I don’t think that Justin has generated the reminders for March. You are
certainly welcome to add a report without a reminder.
Regards,
Dave
> On Feb 26, 2019, at 9:35 AM, Makoto Yui wrote:
>
> Justin,
>
> We (dev@hivemall.i.a.o) did not receive Incubator report notification
>
Thanks everyone for the discussion thus far. Based on it, I have uploaded
an updated proposal here:
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TVMProposal
The changes made are:
1. Rectify the language around PMC vs. PMC member. Thanks Greg, for
pointing that out!
2. Adding Furkan, Timothy and
Justin,
We (dev@hivemall.i.a.o) did not receive Incubator report notification
this month.
I'm now aware of it but some podling might not be aware of it if
notification is missing. JFYI.
Thanks,
Makoto
2019年2月21日(木) 7:15 Justin Mclean :
>
> Hi,
>
> Here’s the timeline for March [1]
>
> Wed
On 2/26/2019 8:20 AM, David P Grove wrote:
>
> Or in the case of the current OpenWhisk podling voting thread [1], our only
> mentor has already voted +1, but after a week we still need two more IPMC
> votes to be able to proceed.
>
> Please help
>
Sorry, I was not aware of that issue. I'm
Hmmm ... this is really odd ...
On the one side we have lengthy discussions about non-mentors from resisting to
interfere, but on the other hand podlings are begging for such "interference".
Guess there are always two sides of the discussion.
And I have to admit that for a short time I was
Hi Dave
I offered my helps at your thread. Sorry you wait such long time.
--
Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin
Twitter, wusheng1108
-- Original --
From: "David P Grove";
Date: Tue, Feb 26, 2019 09:20 PM
To: "general";
Sorry, I only could provide +0.
I checked
1. Download source tar.
2. LICENSE, NOTICE and DISCLAIMER exists.
3. acs checked.
4. sha512 exist but check failure.
The reason I only provide +0 is, Bertrand Delacretaz shows the right sha512,
but the file in release folder is not correct.
If you
Craig Russell wrote on 02/25/2019 09:15:56 PM:
>
> To me, the biggest issue with incubating releases has been lack of
> engagement by mentors for release voting. Many examples from history
> have podlings begging for someone, anyone, to review a release that
> has already received review in
Hi all,
Thanks to everyone that participated. The vote to release Apache
Daffodil 2.3.0-rc1 is now closed. It has passed with 3 +1 (binding)
votes and no 0 or -1 votes.
Binding:
+1 Dave Fisher
+1 Christofer Dutz
+1 Sheng Wu
Vote thread:
Hi Steve
Here is my +1 binding.
Sorry doesn't take part the vote earlier. Look like you have wait one week.
You should be good to continue release process. Good luck.
Checked
1. Compile passed.
2. sha256 and sha512 existed and checked.
3. NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, LICENSE exist and look like right.
Thanks Chris. The Daffodil devs agree that the issues you found are not
blockers and will be fixed for the next release.
As a reminder to the IPMC, Daffodil really only has 1 active mentor so
will likely need another vote from a non-mentor for the VOTE to pass. We
would greatly appreciate it if
Thanks for sharing. This document could help a lot.
I think Zipkin learn from it. SkyWalking has similar one.
Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking, ShardingSphere, Zipkin
From Wu Sheng 's phone.
-- Original --
From: Huxing Zhang
Date: Tue,Feb 26,2019 5:53 PM
To:
Hi community,
Recently the Dubbo project has summarized a document[1] of how to
prepare for an Apache release. Given the recent discussion happening
on the list, I think it might be helpful for other projects to get
some knowledge about how to prepare for an Apache release.
Until now the Dubbo
54 matches
Mail list logo
