[jira] [Updated] (INCUBATOR-208) Transferring guide needs an editing pass

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-208?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Jim Apple updated INCUBATOR-208: Description: There are a number of issues with the transferring page: "foundation/officer

Re: DataSketches Proposal - Google Docs Link

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Doris Proposal

Looks good to me. Thanks! On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:17 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > Hi - > > There was no reply yet. I made a change to the proposal. > > > On Jul 2, 2018, at 9:51 AM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > > > Hi Jim, > > > >> On Jun 30, 2018, at 8:58 A

Re: [DISCUSS] Doris Proposal

Can you help me understand which portion of this document addresses the discussions that occurred on the thread? The thread included discussion of 1. The name 2. Licence and copyright 3. Attribution (Tim's Impala patch that was copied without attribution) 4. Impala integration 5. Mentors and

Re: Looking for Champion

3, Define clearly the interface between the query engine and other > components, such as the storage engine, metadata management, mysql server, > load and export modules, web server and so on. > 4. Separate the Impala query engine from Palo. > > > Best Regards, > Reed >

Re: Looking for Champion

> > I'm not sure if Palo is just a storage system but definitely we will > separate query engine from Palo. > That's great news, and I think it will benefit users of Impala and Palo. > Of cource, as you mentioned, "this could be a lot of work", so it will > take a long time and we also hope

Re: Looking for Champion

Let me respond specifically to a few of these as a way to, I hope, inspire the Palo community to reconsider contributing to Impala. It could be a great opportunity for us to produce value by keeping the query engine working smoothly while the Palo community can focus more of their efforts on the

Re: Looking for Champion

O > it is ok for the relationship between Impala PMC and a pooling PPMC to be a > work in process. > > (4) Currently, Willem, Luke Han and Dave Fisher are qualified to officially > mentor. I suggest that Sijie Guo and Zheng Shao be included as Initial > Committers in order to help f

Re: Looking for Champion

e's Internet advertising > >>>>> business. Mesa is designed to satisfy complex and challenging set of > >>>>>users’ > >>>>> and systems’ requirements, including near real-time data ingestion > >>>>>and > >>>>> query

Re: Looking for Champion

> > Generally Apache has no rules against multiple projects fulfilling similar > goals or use cases, even when those projects might compete. However I think > it would be relatively unusual to incubate a project that appears to be > derived from a fork of an existing project, at least without

Re: Looking for Champion

Hello! As a contributor to Impala, I’d be interested in hearing thoughts from the Palo community about integration between Impala and Palo. For instance, are there any apparent design goals of Impala that the Palo community thinks are fundamentally incompatible with Palo? Thanks, Jim On

[jira] [Created] (INCUBATOR-208) Transferring guide needs an editing pass

Jim Apple created INCUBATOR-208: --- Summary: Transferring guide needs an editing pass Key: INCUBATOR-208 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-208 Project: Incubator Issue Type

[jira] [Resolved] (INCUBATOR-207) Update advice-for-new-pmc-chairs.txt for new graduation guide

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Jim Apple resolved INCUBATOR-207. - Resolution: Fixed LGTM, thanks! > Update advice-for-new-pmc-chairs.txt for new graduat

[jira] [Created] (INCUBATOR-207) Update advice-for-new-pmc-chairs.txt for new graduation guide

Jim Apple created INCUBATOR-207: --- Summary: Update advice-for-new-pmc-chairs.txt for new graduation guide Key: INCUBATOR-207 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-207 Project: Incubator

Re: Graduation: who mails the board?

arma to do this, one of your mentors will have to do > it for you. > > Craig > > > On Nov 11, 2017, at 8:44 PM, Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > > I think I understand. I will write the email, but what is the mechanism > by > > w

Re: Graduation: who mails the board?

agree this is a bit ambiguous. > > What you should do is to send a message to the board with a link to the > [RESULT] message and add the resolution [to establish the project] to the > board agenda. > > Craig > > > On Nov 11, 2017, at 8:33 PM, Jim Apple <jbap...@clouder

Graduation: who mails the board?

Impala just passed the IPMC graduation-to-TLP vote. The graduation guide says that the board is then emailed, but it is worded in the passive voice: "Once the resolution has been finalized and consensus reached, it should be submitted to the Board." Who is the intended sender of that email: the

[RESULT] Resolution to graduate Apache Impala to TLP

The vote[0] to graduate Impala to a TLP is concluded. The result is to recommend graduation. Binding votes: +1: Seven (John D. Ament, Pierre Smits, Todd Lipcon, Carl Steinbach, Byung-Gon Chun, Jean-Baptiste Onofré, Tom White) 0: none -1: none Non-binding votes: +1: One (Zheng, Kai) 0: none -1:

[VOTE] Resolution to graduate Apache Impala to TLP

..@apache.org> * Brock Noland <br...@apache.org> * Carl Steinbach <c...@apache.org> * Casey Ching <ca...@apache.org> * Daniel Hecht <dhe...@apache.org> * Dimitris Tsirogiannis <dtsirogian...@apache.org> * Henry Robinson <he...@apache.org> * Ishaan Joshi <ish...

Re: [DISCUSS] Resolution to graduate Apache Impala to TLP

gt; Hi Jim, have you verified with all of the proposed members that they would > like to continue on with the project once it completes incubation? > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> The Impala community has discussed and

[DISCUSS] Resolution to graduate Apache Impala to TLP

gt; * Bharath Vissapragada <bh...@apache.org> * Brock Noland <br...@apache.org> * Carl Steinbach <cw...@apache.org> * Casey Ching <ca...@apache.org> * Daniel Hecht <dh...@apache.org> * Dimitris Tsirogiannis <dt...@apache.org> * Henry Robinson <he...@apache.org

Impala is conducting a community graduation vote

Following https://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#community_graduation_vote , this is a notification that Impala is having a community graduation vote at https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a5a7c6895b3e019347d6e4e4cf49d67d094d31b8f2c7b4d59200f3e4@%3Cdev.impala.apache.org%3E

What are the infra steps when a podling graduates?

There used to be a long list of things to do when a podling graduates: https://web.archive.org/web/20121203165354/https://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#project-first-steps This is still referenced on that page ("Consider post graduation tasks"), but it is not actually referenced on

Re: [RESULT] Vote on Impala 2.10.0 release candidate 2

I have updated the release instructions at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IMPALA/How+to+Release to reflect this addition. On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 10:10 AM, sebb wrote: > The summary is easy to read, but has no context. > > Ideally the result mail should either

Re: Podlings & Apache Project Maturity Model (was RE: [DISCUSS] Graduate Apache RocketMQ from podling to TLP)

> I'll be honest, I have no idea why they > think they have to do it, but they do it. I suspect it is because projects are motivated to graduate and believe that one or more people on the IPMC with -1 their graduation if they do not complete the model and put a check mark in every box. I

Re: Podlings & Apache Project Maturity Model (was RE: [DISCUSS] Graduate Apache RocketMQ from podling to TLP)

> It's *very* helpful to have podlings consider their growth using some > form of structured and consistent criteria, so IPMC (and board) can > consider how different podlings see themselves compared to past podling > history. I think the current Model has a number of vague statements that are

Re: [DRAFT] Incubator PMC Board Report - August 2017

> * Podlings missing sign off, will be moved to failed to report This is new, right? I don't see it in my email archives that "will be moved to failed to report" has appeared previously. - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: svn commit: r1802207 - /incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/impala.xml

The rosters are then hidden from people who aren't committers on some ASF project, yes? On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 2:38 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > Just as a reminder, podling rosters only need to be maintained in whimsy. > > John > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 4:09 PM

Updating XML status pages

http://incubator.apache.org/guides/website.html says: "Podling status files are maintained in SVN, and you should continue to maintain them at http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects/; Are those updated XML files ever published automatically? As of a few months

Re: Looking for GPG key signers in Boston area

"Signing keys SHOULD be linked into a strong web of trust." On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:29 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > Is there a guide you're getting that from? When I look at [1] it seems we > trust the

Re: Clarification/typo on release votes (Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Tamaya 0.3-incubating)

The third condition is implied by the second one. I do not believe the second condition is implied by "Votes on whether a package is ready to be released use majority approval -- i.e., at least three PMC members must vote affirmatively for release, and there must be more positive than negative

Re: [DRAFT] What the new Status Pages potentially look like

Thank you for the responses. >> 5. Make sure the Whimsy page applies to all projects. For instance, >> Impala releases are source tarballs, so if "Binary Distribution >> Licensing" means something about a non-source-tarball release >> artefact, it's not meaningful for Impala. >> > > Hmm that's

Re: [DRAFT] What the new Status Pages potentially look like

f 2.8 which was the first > release to have no issues during review. > > But please do continue to provide input, want to make sure we're building > something useful, not a pain. > > HTH, > > John > > On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 8:52 PM Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com>

Re: [DRAFT] What the new Status Pages potentially look like

ts >> may be confirmed but then something is added which negates those rights >> until the issue is cleared up. >> >> > +1 > > >> I wonder if it makes sense to provide links to email threads and/or Wiki >> pages with the details? >>

Re: Podling release vote terminology

In that case, I oppose this change. I believe the status quo is just as clear as this new proposal. On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:30 AM, Craig Russell <apache@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jim, > > Good questions. > > > On May 9, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Jim Apple <

Re: Podling release vote terminology

If PPMC members A, B, and C, who are not IPMC members, vote +1 on a release, and then the second phase starts, acquires three +1 IPMC votes, but A, B, and C change their votes to -1, does the release pass? Hoe long must the first phase last? How long may it last? If in the first phase, the vote

Re: Airflow voting on release artifacts

Would virtualenv help by avoiding the "Requirement already satisfied" complaints? On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Bolke de Bruin wrote: > Thank you thinking with us, that’s really appreciated. Unfortunately, many > of the assumptions from the Java world do not apply to the

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache CarbonData podling graduation

> Actually, the Maturity Model can be a very nice framework to organize > incubation around. If you're talking about a platonic MM, then I agree. If you are talking about the MM at https://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html, I think it needs to be much more

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

aduate", "Some > Community Growth", "No Release" and "Still Getting Started." I'm simply > asking the podling to decide which of those 4 best describe themselves. > > John > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:40 PM Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote:

Re: [DISCUSS] Podling report format changes

There were a number of people who opposed the use of the maturity model on this list in 2016. For instance, Greg Stein said: "There has been past controversy on including that as a graduation step. I'm not clear that was a proper addition." and "The Board has never required the IPMC to use the

Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.8.0 release candidate 1

Thank you for the vote and the careful checking. On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > +1 (binding) > > I checked: > - name includes incubating > - signatures and hashed correct > - disclaimer exists > - LICENSE is OK > - NOTICE Is OK (but year

[RESULT] [VOTE] Impala 2.8.0 release candidate 1

The release has passed. The vote is: +1 (binding): Tom White John D. Ament Justin Mclean +1 (non-binding): Ian Dunlop - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.8.0 release candidate 1

Thank you, John! We now need only one more binding +1 for this release. On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 6:30 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:58 AM Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> Impala 2.8.0 release cand

Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.8.0 release candidate 1

Since sending this, we have accumulated one non-binding vote, for a total of one binding and one non-binding +1. We still need two binding +1s to officially release. On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > Impala 2.8.0 release candidate 1 has passed a

Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.8.0 release candidate 1

Thank you for taking the time to check the artifact and vote. > I didn't RAT check because I didn't have a rat.xml to use the script > against and I wasn't sure how to create one. bin/check-rat-report.py describes, on lines 28-30, how to run it, including how to create rat.xml. > Also the build

[VOTE] Impala 2.8.0 release candidate 1

Impala 2.8.0 release candidate 1 has passed a PPMC vote; this email is a call for an IPMC vote. The PPMC vote thread is: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/f873d0f82f0619d7d9a18440a74ea2961e63e4db0c5216a9d08b6517@%3Cdev.impala.apache.org%3E

Re: Podling request steps have been updated

e two different credentials in places. > > John > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 12:00 AM Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> Step 8: who has access to reporeq.apache.org? Which of a person's >> various apache un/pw pairs is to be used to login? >> >&g

Re: [VOTE] Drop incubating requirement of Maven artifacts

> Though I feel the pain for existing projects such as Groovy and > Freemarker, they are not typical. What percentage of active incubating projects had "a track record of high-quality releases before entering incubation"? - To

Re: Podling request steps have been updated

Step 8: who has access to reporeq.apache.org? Which of a person's various apache un/pw pairs is to be used to login? On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 8:45 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > All, > > I just got done editing the podling request page on the public website. > Its based on

Re: [VOTE] Drop incubating requirement of Maven artifacts

> If a project is well setup and mature then it should do incubation in under 6 > months, isn't? Are you sure? What does the CDF of incubation time look like? How many finish in 6 months? Beam just graduated in 10 months, and several people on this list seemed to call it a model of incubation:

Re: Incoming Website Changes

quot; document and make the guides the policy documents? There > shouldn't be opinions on what makes a functioning podling, it should be > pretty cut and dry: > > - public discussions > - apache licensed code > - made successful releases without issues > - using ASF infra resour

Re: Github tagging, was Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Joshua 6.1 RC#2

> You can just make the release on a branch rather than in a fork/mirror. This is what Impala did and Github still happily treats those off-master-branch tags as "releases". - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: Github tagging, was Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Joshua 6.1 RC#2

gt; > Some projects have handled this by moving release votes to a different > (mirror/fork) of the project. I don't see anything wrong with taking that > approach. > > John > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 2:41 PM Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > >> >

Github tagging, was Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Joshua 6.1 RC#2

> Also the 6.1 release has already been tagged and it available for public > download on github [4] before this vote is finished. This is IMO against > Apache release policy [3] please remove. > 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what > 4.

Re: Incoming Website Changes

One way to make The Guide clearer is to make The Policy more accurate. As it is, The Policy is contradicted in various other places on the lists or in the guide or in practice, so as a person who is trying to understand what incubation and graduation are really like, The Policy doesn't read as

Re: How to denote unusual copyright circumstances, was Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.7.0 release candidate 3

Thanks, Stian - I'll fix this squeasel notification issue in LICENSE. I'll talk to the Impala community about whether this is "important enough" or "just an innocent embedded dependency". On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote: > On 4 October 2016 at 20:21,

[RESULT] [VOTE] Impala 2.7.0 release candidate 3

The vote passes with: +1's (all binding) Carl Steinbach Justin Mclean Tom White (one of Impala's mentors, see the PPMC vote thread: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-impala-dev/201609.mbox/%3ccaf-wd4sf4wrnjn6mjjfj7t07feuwe-kamdrmjmava1jg5-w...@mail.gmail.com%3E or

Re: How to denote unusual copyright circumstances, was Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.7.0 release candidate 3

After further consideration, I have a patch in flight to fix that. It is a compiled source file. However, my question was intended to be broader. As Henry notes, there are some files that are Copyright Cloudera that were not part of the SGA. How shall we annotate those to let future IPMC release

How to denote unusual copyright circumstances, was Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.7.0 release candidate 3

Thank you for the review, Justin. I have changed the subject so as not to clutter the VOTE thread. > - One possible binary file that shouldn’t be in the source release? [15] (not > sure what this is) This (an another couple of things in your review) might stay the same in the next release, but

Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.7.0 release candidate 3

ase then. >> >> Thanks >> -Todd >> >> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> >> > Oh, I forgot to mention - to check the RAT report, you can use the >> > script in bin/check-rat-report.py and

Re: [VOTE] Impala 2.7.0 release candidate 3

Oh, I forgot to mention - to check the RAT report, you can use the script in bin/check-rat-report.py and the list of files to exclude from bin/rat_exclude_files.txt On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Jim Apple <jbap...@cloudera.com> wrote: > The Impala PPMC has voted to release 2.7.

[VOTE] Impala 2.7.0 release candidate 3

The Impala PPMC has voted to release 2.7.0 release candidate 3: Proposal: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-impala-dev/201609.mbox/%3CCAC-pSX36EbVohLNXdg7pV7i3gkv5_JajZ8ekbZM9OguOi9fH0Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E Mirror:

How to add an incubator report to an "Immutable Page"?

I'd like to add our incubator report for Impala[0] to the report wiki page[1]. However, the header of that page informs me, when logged in with my username "JimApple" that it is an "Immutable Page". What is the procedure for getting append access to that page? I see that sometimes people ask on