Re: [PROPOSAL] Brooklyn

Hi Henry, Thanks for the feedback. We currently have both a dev and a user list, as Chip notes, and they are used by different people. That's why we thought we should move both across to apache as part of this proposal. Does that make sense in this situation? Best Alex On 24/04/2014 22:0

Re: [PROPOSAL] Brooklyn

Hi Alex, Looking forward for Brooklyn as part of ASF incubator, awesome project. Most existing projects that come to Apache incubator already had user and dev lists, but most of the times the IPMCs encourage to have initially dev@ list to focus on integration with ASF and also to centralized disc

Re: [PROPOSAL] Brooklyn

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/23/2014 09:28 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > We would also like to solicit contributions from additional IPMC > members willing to mentor the potential podling. Anyone > interested? I'd be interested in signing on as a mentor. Best, jzb - -- Joe

Re: [PROPOSAL] Brooklyn

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Chip Childers wrote: > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:28:15AM -0400, Chip Childers wrote: >> The Brooklyn project [1] community is interested in moving to the ASF. They >> have worked within their community to create a proposal [2] for the >> Incubator, and have manag

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

Optiq has been a key technology underscoring the progress of Drill. It has wide applicability for any project that needs SQL parsing and cost based optimization. Julian has been carrying this torch for a long time, but I really think that having a wider community would help. On Thu, May 1, 201

RE: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

I see a lot of conceptual similarity between Optiq and the Apache MetaModel (incubator) project [1]. Maybe something can be done to align the two projects, so that we avoid having two incubating projects that do basically the same thing? Or maybe there's some glaring difference that I am missin

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

I think that there is a huge difference between Metamodel and Optiq. In particular: - Optiq provides real SQL including nested queries, correlated sub-queries and so on - Metamodel uses a fluent Java API ... SQL parsing and transformation doesn't appear to be a goal - Optiq provides highly adva

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

I agree with Ted. Optiq is a full fledged cost-based query optimization framework for relational workloads. I also want to highlight Optiq's JDBC infrastructure (and ODBC at a later point as well). Rather than implementing the JDBC specification, Optiq users only have to implement a few interfaces

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

Apache Hive has recently started work to integrate with Optiq as well. Having it as an Apache project will be good for both Optiq and Apache. Alan. On Apr 30, 2014, at 3:21 PM, Ashutosh Chauhan wrote: > I would like to propose Optiq as an Apache Incubator project. I have > posted the proposa

RE: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

_ From: Ted Dunning [ted.dunn...@gmail.com] Sent: 01 May 2014 09:14 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq I think that there is a huge difference between Metamodel and Optiq. In particular: - Optiq provides real SQL including nested queries, correlated sub-queries and so

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

Unfortunately, similar projects entering Apache incubator are common things =( Even though each original project proposers can argue about differences in one way or another, it will eventually decided by adoption and community growth, and at the end the quality of the project itself. Some other i

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

One could imagine as part of the case for incubation and graduation both an articulation of the project's place in the larger ecosystem, similar to how academic papers customarily place their work and novel findings within the larger field in 'Related Work'. If not part of the initial proposal, the

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Kasper Sørensen < kasper.soren...@humaninference.com> wrote: > - Can you explain or link to more information about the type inference you > mention? > The type inferencing is used by Drill. The problem is that strong typing is normally required to parse SQL state

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > One could imagine as part of the case for incubation and graduation both an > articulation of the project's place in the larger ecosystem, similar to how > academic papers customarily place their work and novel findings within the > larger fi

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014, at 03:21 PM, Ashutosh Chauhan wrote: > I would like to propose Optiq as an Apache Incubator project. I have > posted the proposal to https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OptiqProposal > and > posted the text of the proposal below. > > Ashutosh. Given the importance of Optiq f

RE: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

sible, and differentiate where it makes sense. -Original Message- From: shaposh...@gmail.com [mailto:shaposh...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Roman Shaposhnik Sent: 2. maj 2014 01:49 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andrew Purtell

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > If not part of the initial proposal, then > at least making a good case as a criteria for graduation, and writing up > related work and how the new project differentiates could be an initial > task done on JIRA after acceptance along the line

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

All that I suggest is that candidate Apache projects articulate how they differ from related projects, and that we consider the strength of this argument when evaluating the long term viability of the effort and community. It would be good if proposals have a "related work" section done with the di

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

HI Ashutosh, Since there was a question/ comment about relationship with Apache MetaModel, I am asking to update the proposal to include this discussion in either "Relationships with Other Apache Products" or "Alignment" section before going for a VOTE. Apache Slider did the same thing with relat

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

Ah sorry, I did not mean "asking to update", I meant "proposing to update". Thanks, - Henry On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Henry Saputra wrote: > HI Ashutosh, > > Since there was a question/ comment about relationship with Apache > MetaModel, I am asking to update the proposal to include this

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

All fair points. However (as your example demonstrates), referring to this duplication as "failure" instead of evolution biases the incubator to protect existing projects. Putting new projects on the defensive is almost always unfair, unless they're literally forking an existing project. As you sa

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

I realize this is a discussion about Optiq in particular, so please pardon the detour. I won't continue this discussion in this thread further. On the subject of Optiq, I'd be +1 for incubation considering that at least two Apache projects incorporate it substantially, and a third is considering i

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > All that I suggest is that candidate Apache projects articulate how they > differ from related projects, and that we consider the strength of this > argument when evaluating the long term viability of the effort and > community. It would be

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

Now that discussion is settling down, I will start a vote thread shortly. On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Ashutosh Chauhan wrote: > Thanks everyone for great feedback. With Julian's help I have updated the > section "Relationships with Other Apache projects" so that folks can get a > sense wher

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

The “Relationships with Other Apache Products” section has been updated to cover Optiq’s functional overlaps with existing Apache projects. https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OptiqProposal#Relationships_with_Other_Apache_Products Julian On May 2, 2014, at 11:23 AM, Henry Saputra wrote: > Ah so

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Sounds good to me. I'm not into Hadoop, but sounds like it's useful. The code seems to be ALv2 since quite some time thus I don't see much legal issues in this respect. LieGrue, strub On Tuesday, 13 May 2014, 6:09, Chris Aniszczyk wrote: We would like to propose Parquet as an Apache Incubato

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Proposal looks good to me! Eagerly awaiting the vote. -Todd On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Chris Aniszczyk wrote: > We would like to propose Parquet as an Apache Incubator project. > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ParquetProposal > > Feel free to comment, we'll go for a vote in a week or

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Changed some of the mailing lists requested to match the format currently in use. One question I had was do we plan to merge parquet-mr and parquet-format into one parquet repo as listed in the proposal or keep them separated? Other than that looks good -Jake On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Chr

Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

Yes, thanks updating the proposal. Really appreciate it. - Henry On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Julian Hyde wrote: > The “Relationships with Other Apache Products” section has been updated to > cover Optiq’s functional overlaps with existing Apache projects. > > https://wiki.apache.org/incuba

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Like most new projects coming to incubator I always check on how busy is the existing user@ list in Parquet right now? If most questions or concerns are related to development, I would suggest to remove request for user@ list for now to get the project focus on moving to ASF development infrastruc

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Hi! proposal looks good to me and I am very much looking for a voting thread. One small request, since I plan to spend a fair amount of time on Parquet anyway, would you guys be ok with adding me as an extra mentor so I can help with that aspect of the project as well? Thanks, Roman. P.S. Plus

RE: [PROPOSAL] Optiq

Good section. I do agree to what it says and somehow hope we can eventually help each other out with e.g. a library of adaptors. -Original Message- From: Julian Hyde [mailto:julianh...@gmail.com] Sent: 8. maj 2014 20:03 To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Optiq The

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

SGTM Roman, thanks for volunteering! I'll start the vote on Sunday barring any issues. On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > Hi! > > proposal looks good to me and I am very much looking > for a voting thread. > > One small request, since I plan to spend a fair amount > of

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Roman -- you've been added, thanks for volunteering :) One Jake's repo question, I think it would be somewhat problematic, and we'd prefer multiple git repos. Format and the java code are currently versioned separately and have different builds (format is much lighter). Plus, if we add, for exampl

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Thanks Dmitriy Thats what I thought we would do but just wanted to make sure, proposal updated to reflect the main imports that we will need -Jake On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Dmitriy Ryaboy wrote: > Roman -- you've been added, thanks for volunteering :) > > One Jake's repo question, I thi

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Chris, could you please address my concern about user@ list - Henry On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Chris Aniszczyk wrote: > SGTM Roman, thanks for volunteering! > > I'll start the vote on Sunday barring any issues. > > > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > >> Hi! >> >>

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Your request about the user list seems fine, no need to have multiple lists atm IMHO. The proposal has been updated accordingly, thanks! https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ParquetProposal?action=recall&rev=21 On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Henry Saputra wrote: > Chris, could you please addres

Re: [PROPOSAL] Parquet

Cool, thanks! Looking forward for the VOTE thread :) On Saturday, May 17, 2014, Chris Aniszczyk wrote: > Your request about the user list seems fine, no need to have multiple lists > atm IMHO. > > The proposal has been updated accordingly, thanks! > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ParquetPropo

Re: [PROPOSAL] Buildr

> Here is a proposal for Buildr incubation. Buildr is a simple and intuitive > build system for Java projects written in Ruby (and based on Rake). The > complete proposal is at [1] and also reproduced at the end of this e-mail. > > Feedback and questions are very welcome! Mentors volunteering too :

Re: [PROPOSAL] Buildr

On 10/24/07, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...= Initial Committers = > > * Assaf Arkin > * Alex Boisvert > * Matthieu Riou... Considering the recent discussions about diversity, would it be ok for you to include these people's company affiliations in the proposal? -Bertrand

Re: [PROPOSAL] Buildr

Hey, On 10/24/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/24/07, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ...= Initial Committers = > > > > * Assaf Arkin > > * Alex Boisvert > > * Matthieu Riou... > > Considering the recent discussions about diversity, would it be ok for >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Buildr

On 10/23/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 10/24/07, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ...= Initial Committers = > > > > * Assaf Arkin > > * Alex Boisvert > > * Matthieu Riou... > > Considering the recent discussions about diversity, would it be ok for > you

Re: [PROPOSAL] Buildr

On 10/24/07, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey, > > On 10/24/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 10/24/07, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > ...= Initial Committers = > > > > > > * Assaf Arkin > > > * Alex Boisvert > > > * Matthieu Riou... > >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Buildr

On 10/24/07, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...Sure, just added it. Right now diversity is not that good as we're all 3 > from the same company, but that's one of things we hope to fix during > incubation Cool, thanks for clarifying! -Bertrand ---

RE: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

Hi everyone, Unless my mail filters are playing tricks on me, haven't seen any feedback on the incubator list since sending this proposal out last week. Hopefully that's a good thing, meaning no one's opposed. =) Anyone have feedback? If no objections are voiced, when would it be appropriate for

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On 1/24/08, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > === Core Developers === > Thrift currently has developers across many organizations (e.g. > Facebook, Powerset, ReCaptcha, AmieStreet), many of whom are > contributors to other open source projects. If I look at the initial committers list, I s

RE: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

Sorry I didn't post in response to your original mail - I was in the middle of a laptop failure (now recovered with no harm done). I'm certainly in favour of this as a project. My main concern is that it is already relatively mature, which will make it harder to draw a broader community. Also, mak

RE: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

ashorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:34 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift On 1/24/08, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > === Core Developers === > Thrift currently has developers across many org

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote: > What we'd really > like to set up here is a system where there are different people with > committer priveleges to different parts of the project. Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons; 1. Creating boundaries within a project, yet coll

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

Niclas Hedhman schrieb: > On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote: > >> What we'd really >> like to set up here is a system where there are different people with >> committer priveleges to different parts of the project. >> > > Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons; > > 1

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

Niclas I also had exactly the same thoughts on reading the email. I think learning that committership is a position of trust is a key part of the incubation process. So I'm +1 on the proposal, but I would definitely be -1 on graduation if such a scheme were to be implemented during incubation. P

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On 30.01.2008, at 10:35, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote: What we'd really like to set up here is a system where there are different people with committer priveleges to different parts of the project. Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons; 1.

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Wednesday 30 January 2008 19:30, Erik Abele wrote: > In the end they are here to learn The A Way and if it turns out to be   > a problem then they won't be able to graduate so I think it's   > premature to turn down the proposal just because of this. Correct, but putting it in place increases t

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

ework built on Thrift. If accepted into Apache, we'd likely > also include Scribe as a sub-project or contrib submission to Thrift. > We'd be interested to hear if that'd be appropriate or what the general > approach is to subprojects or non-core addons. > > Cheers,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Jan 30, 2008 2:24 AM, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What we'd really > like to set up here is a system where there are different people with > committer priveleges to different parts of the project. I'm not a huge fan of this, but I love the rest of the proposal, so +1 to it! I'm also

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

"Mark Slee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Anyone have feedback? If no objections are voiced, when would it be > appropriate for us to move forward with a VOTE thread on this? Sorry for not responding. I flagged the email when I first saw it but didn't have time to respond. Overall the proposal

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Jan 30, 2008, at 4:45 PM, J Aaron Farr wrote: "Mark Slee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Anyone have feedback? If no objections are voiced, when would it be appropriate for us to move forward with a VOTE thread on this? Sorry for not responding. I flagged the email when I first saw it but did

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

Yoav Shapira wrote: On Jan 30, 2008 2:24 AM, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What we'd really like to set up here is a system where there are different people with committer priveleges to different parts of the project. I'm not a huge fan of this, but I love the rest of the proposal, so +

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Jan 29, 2008 2:44 AM, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry I didn't post in response to your original mail - I was in the > middle of a laptop failure (now recovered with no harm done). > > I'm certainly in favour of this as a project. My main concern is that it > is already relatively

Re: [Proposal] NoNameYet

kelvin goodson wrote: Hi all, We've posted an Apache Incubator proposal onto the incubator wiki http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NoNameYetProposal We haven't got a good name yet, SandStorm is a contender, as is Snowdon Suggestions and comments welcome, Kelvin.

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

I'm happy with the reponses given so +1 to Thrift from me. Niall On Jan 24, 2008 2:07 AM, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > We've just posted the Apache Incubator proposal for Thrift onto the > Wiki: > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ThriftProposal > > For those who prefer readi

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote: J Aaron Farr wrote: git could be an issue. Can you explain what the issue is with Git? Probably not very well :-). Basically, we know how to do the apache- style open source process using centralized version control, we don't quite know how t

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Feb 2, 2008 2:48 PM, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote: > > J Aaron Farr wrote: > >> git could be an issue. > > > > Can you explain what the issue is with Git? > > Probably not very well :-). Basically, we know how to do the apache- > style ope

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

David Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > J Aaron Farr wrote: >> git could be an issue. > > Can you explain what the issue is with Git? Leo already gave a decent explanation. Basically, it comes down to two aspects: 1) infrastructure support 2) cultural bias There's no "No git" rule that I

RE: [Proposal] NoNameYet

kelvin goodson wrote: > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/NoNameYetProposal As Paul and Mattieu asked, since SDO is quite closely aligned with SCA, is there any point or interest in working with, or joining, Tuscany? --- Noel

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > As long as you remember that you can't release or graduate > without properly > > audited code with a paper trail to the original author of the code. > > You can release from the incubator before all IP is cleared. No you can't: from the

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release > history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first > release. Anyways, throwing away the code just to *enter* the Incubator > is neither required True

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first release. Anyways, throwing away the code just to *enter* the Incubator is neither required nor seems like a good approach. Andrus On Feb 4, 2008, at 2:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Feb 4, 2008, at 3:41 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote: On Feb 4, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: And to be quite frank, it feels very counterproductive to me to remove code from the project with full a priori intention of putting it back in. Are you sure you will get the appro

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Feb 4, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: And to be quite frank, it feels very counterproductive to me to remove code from the project with full a priori intention of putting it back in. Are you sure you will get the appropriate ICLA's from all the authors that have contribu

RE: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

o: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release > history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first > release. Anyways,

RE: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:48 -0800, Mark Slee wrote: > Well, note that this isn't strictly an IP issue. The issue here was the > committers list, not the IP of the code. I don't see why all the code > would need to be written by people on the initial committers list to > pass IP restrictions. > >

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

Yes, there is a subtle disjoint or two. :) Excluding patches that simply modify an existing artifact, we do need licensing agreements from all individual contributors, regardless of whether they become ASF committers or members of the podling PMC. Otherwise, the ASF does not have clear title to th

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

+1 to Ted's message. I am not trying to sabotage the proposal, just trying to point out the potential problems you might run into during incubation/at graduation. IIUC, you can release code that is completely vetted, so if parts are still unvetted, it would not prevent you from releasing the check

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "Santiago Gala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Feb 2, 2008 2:48 PM, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote: J Aaron Farr wrote: snip... 1. You have to use subversion. Why? Has been a vote done? where? I vote +1 for git if

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On that note, since there has been so discussion on this thread, I think it might be time to open another thread and formally decide whether to accept the Thrift proposal, which I will go do now. -Ted. On Feb 7, 2008 9:14 AM, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 to Ted's message. I am

Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift

On 2/8/08, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On that note, since there has been so discussion on this thread, I > think it might be time to open another thread and formally decide > whether to accept the Thrift proposal, which I will go do now. That was my aim. I didn't want the proposal con

Re: [PROPOSAL] Click

+1. In a crowded web frameworks space, I very much like Click's philosophy of trading off deeper abstractions for simplicity. Last time I used it, the impression was "nice and clean". Haven't used it lately (except for maintaining older projects). I hope it preserved that simplicity as th

Re: [PROPOSAL] Click

Sure. Add yourself to the proposal as a mentor. Thanks a lot for offering help. Best regards Henning On Wed, 2008-07-02 at 22:52 +0300, Andrus Adamchik wrote: > +1. > > In a crowded web frameworks space, I very much like Click's philosophy > of trading off deeper abstr

Re: [PROPOSAL] Click

Cool, page rendering based on Velocity ... :-) ... good to have a break from JSPs Siegfried Goeschl Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: Please see also http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ClickProposal Comments until July 9th, if nothing blocking comes up, I'll CfV on July 10th. --- cut --- = Click

Re: [PROPOSAL] Click

Looks good; do you need a click-commits mailing list? Craig On Jul 2, 2008, at 12:29 PM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: Please see also http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/ClickProposal Comments until July 9th, if nothing blocking comes up, I'll CfV on July 10th. --- cut --- = Click Proposal

RE: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

David, I just reviewed http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TashiProposal. Interesting. Has anyone been in touch with VMware, XenSource, Google, Amazon, et al to invite them to participate? With respect to "Initially, we plan to start with one committer each from Carnegie Mellon and Intel Research,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Noel, I've fixed the wording on the wiki text to clear up the initial committers: We've been talking with the storage group at HP, haven't approached the others yet, but would certainly welcome them. Thanks! Dave http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TashiProposal *** David, I just reviewed ht

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Hi, I've reviewed the proposal as well, sounds pretty interesting. I have a couple of additional questions: * The sponsoring entity is the Incubator so I'm guessing you're shooting for graduating as a TLP. What kind of interactions do you foresee with Hadoop for example? * IIC Tashi is only a

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Matthieu, > * The sponsoring entity is the Incubator so I'm guessing you're shooting > for graduating as a TLP. What kind of interactions do you foresee with > Hadoop for example? We talked with Doug Cutting about whether to shoot for a TLP or a subproject under Hadoop. We decided ultimately to

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 6:55 AM, David O'Hallaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matthieu, > > > * The sponsoring entity is the Incubator so I'm guessing you're shooting > > for graduating as a TLP. What kind of interactions do you foresee with > > Hadoop for example? > > We talked with Doug Cuttin

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Matthieu, Thanks very much. I'll add you as a proposed mentor on the wiki proposal. http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TashiProposal Dave On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 6:55 AM, David O'Hallaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> M

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Noel J. Bergman wrote: With respect to "Initially, we plan to start with one committer each from Carnegie Mellon and Intel Research, with a Yahoo committer to be determined later", that's awkwardly phrased. It appears to imply a corporate representative doing commits for "hidden" people, somethi

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Doug Cutting wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: With respect to "Initially, we plan to start with one committer each from Carnegie Mellon and Intel Research, with a Yahoo committer to be determined later", that's awkwardly phrased. It appears to imply a corporate representative doing commits for "

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

No worries. I've removed the entry on the wiki version of the proposal at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TashiProposal. It now reads simply: Initially, there will be one committer each from Carnegie Mellon and Intel Research: * Michael Stroucken ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) * Michael Ryan ([EMAIL PROTE

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Hi, a number of questions: - Are the proposed committers, people "assigned to work on the project" or are they genuinely interested in this software. IAW, will they stick around or leave as soon as they are reassigned to other projects or their grants run out? The wording for the Yahoo! "slot"

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: - Are the proposed committers, people "assigned to work on the project" or are they genuinely interested in this software. Those are not necessarily disjoint sets. Folks who are "assigned" are frequently also "genuinely interested", and vice versa. IAW, will

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Doug Cutting wrote: There's no conspiracy here to steal Apacheness. Rather, Yahoo!, Intel and CMU would like to collaborate on open source software. Intel and CMU have a prototype, and Yahoo! is interested in helping to develop this further. All three believe that other parties will also b

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:23 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Doug Cutting wrote: >> >> There's no conspiracy here to steal Apacheness. Rather, Yahoo!, Intel and >> CMU would like to collaborate on open source software. Intel and CMU have a >> prototype, and Yahoo! is intere

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

On Thursday 24 July 2008 05:23, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > In other words, I'll vote -1 on any Proposal for non-person entities > X, Y, and Z to form an incubator podling, and I know several other PMC > members who will do likewise. I disagree. IMHO, wording in the proposal is irrelevant. If th

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I really don't see what the problem is here, there are two named > committers in the proposal. Whatever the interests of the companies > they work for, Tashi will have to create a healthy community to > graduate and I don

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi Hi, I've read the messages from Henning and William, and I'd like to address some of the concerns voiced by them. I'm Michael Stroucken, and I'm a senior systems programmer at CMU. That means I am staff, and my interes

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

On 23-Jul-08, at 6:12 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote: I really don't see what the problem is here, there are two named committers in the proposal. Whatever the interests of the companies they work for, Tashi will have to create a healthy community to graduate and I don't think corporate backing shou

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: This looks like a very interesting technology, and when proposed as a collaboration by actual persons A, B, and C (who happen to work for X, Y, and Z) we will have something to discuss. Great, because that's what I think we have. It so happens that persons D, E and

Re: [PROPOSAL] Tashi

Michael Stroucken wrote: I have not been assigned to any part of this project as an employee of the university, and I am participating out of personal interest. I believe the project can improve services not just at our data centers, but at data centers in general. [...] Finally, as for the o

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >