I was hoping to see how things settle out through the rest of the day
and then kick off a vote tomorrow or Wednesday. We had hoped that if
all goes well we'd be an option for the July meeting. So, no rush I
think.
Thanks
Joe
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> 72 hours is
72 hours is customary as minimum. That would miss the Board meeting this
week.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> It sounds like we have consensus. Is there a minimum voting period? Any
> chance we could get this through in time for the NiFi proposal to make the
> Board meeti
It sounds like we have consensus. Is there a minimum voting period? Any
chance we could get this through in time for the NiFi proposal to make the
Board meeting this week?
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 12:26 PM, jan i wrote:
> On 14 June 2015 at 17:52, Joe Witt wrote:
>
> > The community agreed on wh
On 14 June 2015 at 17:52, Joe Witt wrote:
> The community agreed on what we posted originally. Just trying to be
> responsive to niclas concerns in the spirit of the discussion thread.
>
I was not suggesting otherwise.
>
> I have forwarded the thread to our dev list which is where the adjustmen
The community agreed on what we posted originally. Just trying to be
responsive to niclas concerns in the spirit of the discussion thread.
I have forwarded the thread to our dev list which is where the adjustment
to 'interactive' came from. Should these minor rephrasings give pause in
the nifi c
Hi
Sorry for top posting, I do understand why the resolution is being changed,
however it this
really the correct place to do it. The community must be behind and
agreeing to the resolution,
so changes should in my opinion by discussed on your dev@ list.
The IPMC should be presented with a resolu
Adjusted to clarify the 'realtime' reference which can be misleading:
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Management
Committee charged with the creation and maint
It is less generic, but I think I am not in a position to determine what is
suitable. The community + mentors should be a better group to discuss it.
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Joe Witt wrote:
> Niclas,
>
> I agree that the scope could be improved. It is a tough balancing act
> of course.
Niclas,
I agree that the scope could be improved. It is a tough balancing act
of course. How would about this modification:
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best
interests of the Foundation and consistent with the
Foundation's purpose to establish a Project Mana
I'm +1, please feel free to carry my +1 through to
the VOTE.
Cheers,
Chris
From: jan i [j...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 10:04 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Graduate NiFi from the Apache Incubator
thank
>From the peanut gallery;
Doesn't
"related to the automated and managed flow of information between
systems"
apply to at least half of all software out there?
In other words, the scope is very wide, and could include anything from
SNMP to Apache Mesos and much much more. I think the Board will
thanks for the responses I will cast a +1 at vote time.
sorry for asking the questions, but I was insecure.
rgds
jan i
On Friday, June 12, 2015, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Sean sure makes more sense than me.
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Joe Witt > wrote:
> > Sean is one of those folks
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> > ...I have no reason to believe either my engagement or the PPMC's
> willingness
> > to reach out to or listen to what I have to say will change upon
> > graduation, so I don't th
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
> ...I have no reason to believe either my engagement or the PPMC's willingness
> to reach out to or listen to what I have to say will change upon
> graduation, so I don't think they need a checkbox ASF member on the initial
> PMC and I'd prefer
Hello
> it would be nice to see a bit of statistics like number of releases in
> incubator, growth in incubator…
Mailing lists:
The dev mailing list has 123 legit addresses on it and is quite active
for discussion, votes, feature ideas, etc.. We’ve just recently
created a user list as requested
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 5:13 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 12:00 PM, jan i wrote:
> > ...one reason to be in incubator is to learn "the apache way" and that
> > seems hard to learn without other apache people on the project...
>
> Not sure what you mean - the Nifi men
Writing as a member and a mentor, I think that the NiFi podling will
do fine without the 'usual' ASF member that Bertrand is asking about.
However, because I think they'll do fine, I'll sign up if it makes
people more comfy, secure in my belief that I will be a maytag
repairman.
On Fri, Jun 12, 2
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 12:00 PM, jan i wrote:
> ...one reason to be in incubator is to learn "the apache way" and that
> seems hard to learn without other apache people on the project...
Not sure what you mean - the Nifi mentors have voted to graduate it,
which indicates that they are confident
On 12 June 2015 at 09:18, Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Although it's not a strict requirement, the board likes to have at
> least one ASF member in the new project's PMC.
>
> Unless I missed someone I don't think that's the case in proposed PMC
> members list. It looks like none of the pr
Hi Sergio,
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote:
> ...I could jump in case is considered necessary.
> Unfortunately I can't promise that much in terms of code contribution...
It's fine IMO to have 1-2 ASF members on the PMC even if they're not
very active in terms of code. It
Hi Bertrand,
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>
> The best way to fix this is for one or two of your mentors who are ASF
> members to stay on the new PMC, are any of them interested?
>
Initially I was thinking to step off on graduation.
But I could jump in case is cons
Hi,
Although it's not a strict requirement, the board likes to have at
least one ASF member in the new project's PMC.
Unless I missed someone I don't think that's the case in proposed PMC
members list. It looks like none of the proposed PMC members are
committers in other projects, which makes th
Since this is a discussion, it would be nice to see a bit of statitic like
- number of releases in incubator
- growth in incubator
etc.
rgds
jan i
On Thursday, June 11, 2015, Joe Witt wrote:
> Hello Apache Incubator,
>
> At the suggestion of our mentors the NiFi community established
> consensu
Hello Apache Incubator,
At the suggestion of our mentors the NiFi community established
consensus and held a successful vote with 22 +1 votes in favor of
proposing graduation to TLP. Of those votes 5 of them were IPMC
members and several of them are our mentors.
Vote Thread: http://s.apache.org/
24 matches
Mail list logo
