The VOTE is now closed. I will be sending a RESULT mail separately.
Thanks to all who voted.
Thanks,
Arvind Prabhakar
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Arvind Prabhakar arv...@apache.org wrote:
The Apache Sqoop project entered incubator in June of 2011. Since then we
have added three new
Hi Matt...
Allow me to disagree with you :), there is no confusion but the problem
is that most of the people click on reply to all which includes
general@address by mistake most probably they don notice it.
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
Oh Mohammad,
On Feb 21, 2012, at 2:06 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
Hi Matt...
s/Matt/Chris/
Allow me to disagree with you :), there is no confusion but the problem
is that most of the people click on reply to all which includes
general@address by mistake most probably they don
Hi :)
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote:
Oh Mohammad,
On Feb 21, 2012, at 2:06 AM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote:
Hi Matt...
s/Matt/Chris/
Allow me to disagree with you :), there is no confusion but the problem
is that
The Apache Sqoop project entered incubator in June of 2011. Since then we
have added three new committers from diverse organizations and added two
new PPMC members. The codebase of our product has steadily grown and we
have made two releases following the ASF policies and guidelines. Thanks to
the
+1
Jarcec
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 01:00:57AM -0800, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
The Apache Sqoop project entered incubator in June of 2011. Since then we
have added three new committers from diverse organizations and added two
new PPMC members. The codebase of our product has steadily grown and
Thanks Arvind!
+1
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Arvind Prabhakar arv...@apache.org wrote:
The Apache Sqoop project entered incubator in June of 2011. Since then we
have added three new committers from diverse organizations and added two
new PPMC members. The codebase of our product has
Hi,
I will have to cancel this vote thread due to a typo in the vote options in
my original mail below. Specifically, the option to reject the vote
is mentioned as +1 when it should be -1 instead. In order to make sure that
there is absolutely no ambiguity in the vote, I will send out a new vote
Hi Arvind,
I would encourage removing another ambiguity that I saw -- I think you meant
to only hold this on sqoop-dev, right? That's because by the time it gets to the
IPMC, at least one thing I'm interested in is the proposed PMC, if there are
3 ASF members or not, etc., and that would be
Thanks Chris for your feedback. Yes, this vote is only intended to be held
in the Sqoop community. However, according to the guide on graduation [2],
the guidance on community graduation vote explicitly suggests copying the
Incubator general list when the vote is proposed. Hence, I added the
Hi Arvind,
Okey dok, just thought if you were going to cut down on confusion, it might
make sense to *not* include general@, regardless of the guidelines :) Otherwise,
some IPMC person like me might think (regardless of what you put in your email)
that you are intending it as a VOTE for the
11 matches
Mail list logo
