Re: possible interest in forming a community fork of akka

+1 to everything Greg says, although I wouldn’t consider it to be a hostile fork just as I don’t consider the fork of Hudson to Jenkins to be a hostile fork. In my book it isn’t a hostile fork when the major contributors simply switch to the new repository and infrastructure. i.e - if the

Re: possible interest in forming a community fork of akka

Before going too far with this I would be interested to know: 1. Who the initial committers/PMC members would be. 2. How much familiarity the proposed people already have with the code base. 3. How diverse the community is from an employment point of view. In other words, I would be concerned if

Re: Looking for a champion: resurrect log4j 1.x

Justin, See https://lists.apache.org/thread/fz19gsjnlh84nxgxj0jyy2rzrol1dx9b and https://twitter.com/qos_ch/status/1479938932213223424 . However, it is worth noting that

Re: Looking for a champion: resurrect log4j 1.x

> On Jan 8, 2022, at 4:34 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > The Logging PMC is the hostile party here as far as I can tell, operating > in defiance of the community of users that have made the points I have just > written here abundantly clear for years. The Logging PMC is the owner of Log4j

Re: Looking for a champion: resurrect log4j 1.x

> On Dec 22, 2021, at 12:35 AM, Vladimir Sitnikov > wrote: > > > I already asked Logging PMC to enable Git and GitHub for 1.x, and they > rejected it: > https://lists.apache.org/thread/ssbdg44gy7txzl16xxd097t7orco52g2 My recollection was me saying if I had the code in a git repo getting it

Re: Looking for a champion: resurrect log4j 1.x

> On Dec 21, 2021, at 10:24 PM, Vladimir Sitnikov > wrote: > > Matt>Nobody in the Logging PMC is blocking a release here. > > Matt, thanks for the reply, however, it is false :( > I see you are positive, however, many more replies were quite negative. > > R

Re: Looking for a champion: resurrect log4j 1.x

> On Dec 21, 2021, at 9:22 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) wrote: > > But in my experience, first, the log4j12 bridge is not perfect. For > example, since hadoop is still on log4j 1.x, I need to add log4j12 bridge > dependency if I want to run UTs based on hadoop mini cluster, and then I > need to manually

Re: Looking for a champion: resurrect log4j 1.x

I’m sorry, I was just directed to this thread. I don’t read my incubator emails every day since I am not mentoring any podlings at the moment. There seems to be some disconnect with the facts. From my viewpoint they are: An email came in asking if it would be possible to put out a new 1.2.18

Re: JPMS Projects?

JPMS is flat out a PITA. I’ve tried to get Log4j to fully support it and am continuing to work on that. Our current 2.x releases tolerate it primarily by declaring their names in the Manifest but that really isn’t full support. If I were starting out on a brand new project JPMS might be a lot

Re: [DICUSS] Retire Samoa

I don’t really see anything to discuss. Ralph > On Feb 10, 2021, at 7:22 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > My message to the Samoa asking them to consider retirement got no response > [1] so I this think it time to discuss their retirement. Are there any > objections to returning the

Re: Podling releases and release policy

Ask yourself this question - “What is the point of the Incubator”? One of the goals is to teach projects how to create a release that complies with ASF policy. But we would be stupid to expect that on the first Incubator release as we expect projects to come in with already working source code

Re: board report duplication

I should also add that it seems odd to me that the report field is just a string and not and not a container of other fields since reports generally have structure to them. Ralph > On Apr 15, 2019, at 9:25 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > > > >> On Apr 13, 2019, at 4:27 P

Re: board report duplication

> On Apr 13, 2019, at 4:27 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 5:54 PM Ted Dunning wrote: >> >> Moving to a data format that makes a stronger distinction between content >> and envelope might be nice. JSON would work if content is actually quoted >> (don't bet on it). A

Re: Challenges using Gitbox

> On Apr 16, 2018, at 4:22 PM, toki <toki.kant...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 04/16/2018 07:37 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: >> IMO, it is inappropriate to add project managers to a project as a committer >> just because they are employed by a company that has committe

Re: Challenges using Gitbox

> On Apr 16, 2018, at 10:46 AM, Maxime Beauchemin > wrote: > > About PMs, or other "non-coding contributors", it's pretty common to have > them at sponsoring organizations. For example both Airbnb and Lyft both > have a dedicated PM for Apache Superset. While they

Re: Challenges using Gitbox

> On Apr 11, 2018, at 11:11 AM, Maxime Beauchemin > wrote: > > Hi general@incubator! > > This is an email discussing the challenges we are facing while using Github > / Gitbox for our ASF project and wanted to start a thread to discuss > solutions and ways we can

Re: [VOTE] Retire the HTrace Podling

+1 (binding) Ralph > On Apr 11, 2018, at 4:40 PM, lewis john mcgibbney wrote: > > Hi Folks, > Please excuse the error on my part, which essentially missed this important > stage of VOTE'ing on general@ for official retirement of the HTrace Podling. > However, we are here

Re: [VOTE] Accept SkyWalking into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph > On Dec 4, 2017, at 4:17 AM, mck wrote: > > > After some discussion on the SkyWalking proposal, I'd like to raise the > vote on accepting SkyWalking into into the Apache Incubator. > >

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Log4j 2.10.0 released

The Apache Log4j 2 team is pleased to announce the Log4j 2.10.0 release! Apache Log4j is a well known framework for logging application behavior. Log4j 2 is an upgrade to Log4j that provides significant improvements over its predecessor, Log4j 1.x, and provides many other modern features such

Re: Affiliation vs. individual

I have participated in a project since it was in the incubator. More than 90% of the committers & PMC members work for the same company. I don’t have a problem with that from the perspective of how the project is run. The issue I see is that there are only a few significant contributors and

Re: [VOTE] Retire Sirona

+1 to retire. Ralph > On Jun 26, 2017, at 9:50 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > All, > > This is a call to vote the Sirona podling. > > A vote was called for on the dev list for Sirona [1], of which one mentor > commented and that's all. > > Sirona at this point is behind

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

I don’t really know the answer to that. Ralph > On Apr 10, 2017, at 3:35 AM, Thorsten Schöning <tschoen...@am-soft.de> wrote: > > Guten Tag Ralph Goers, > am Montag, 10. April 2017 um 01:12 schrieben Sie: > >> Yes, please go ahead. > > What happens to the fo

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

ect graduation > status. > > John > > On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 1:10 AM Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > Thanks for the info Greg! > > Ralph > > > On Apr 6, 2017, at 9:14 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

Thanks for the info Greg! Ralph > On Apr 6, 2017, at 9:14 PM, Greg Stein wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 4:04 AM, Thorsten Schöning > wrote: > >... > > and I am not quite sure what the process is to move > > from svn

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

Ralph > On Apr 5, 2017, at 10:10 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > No. To be honest, I’m not 100% sure if the community wants to move to git or > not and I am not quite sure what the process is to move from svn to git > without losing history. I gues

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

bator records. > > John > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:45 PM Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com > <mailto:ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>> wrote: > This vote has been open for more than 5 days. It received 5 +1 votes and no > other votes. So we will begin the

[RESULT][VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

This vote has been open for more than 5 days. It received 5 +1 votes and no other votes. So we will begin the process of moving the project back to Logging Services. Ralph > On Mar 11, 2017, at 10:31 AM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > Log4cxx was originall

Re: [VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

ists.apache.org/thread.html/f1bed2e2964fc8de4004aeff2b14f8f99931db2c5d574704b17e16c9@%3Cprivate.logging.apache.org%3E > > I just want to confirm that its well understood by Thorsten that its being > moved back, and if so here's my +1. > > John > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:31 PM

[VOTE] Return Log4cxx to the Logging Services project

Log4cxx was originally a sub-project of the Logging Services. In 2013 several users became frustrated that they were submitting patches but there were no committers who could apply them. The Logging Services PMC was not comfortable making them committers as that would have given them commit

Re: Log4jcxx2 status

we did for CommonsRDF, I'd recommend that > we hold a vote on the general@incubator list indicating the intent to > transfer log4cxx from Incubator to Logging. The steps are pretty close on > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#subproject > > John > > O

Log4jcxx2 status

The attempt to reboot Log4cxx has not had the hoped for results. Under normal circumstances the project would probably be terminated at Apache. However, this project came to the incubator from the Logging Services project in hopes that it would be able to generate more activity since there were

Re: [ALL] Volunteers for a Math IPMC?

I thought this had been made clear. Several months Commons voted to make Math a TLP. But shortly after that most of the people involved with Commons Math felt that a TLP at the ASF would not work for them, so they forked the project and left, effectively voiding the TLP vote since the proposed

Re: [VOTE] Accept PredictionIO into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph > On May 24, 2016, at 3:44 AM, John D. Ament wrote: > > +1 > > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 6:23 PM Andrew Purtell wrote: > >> Since discussion on the matter of PredictionIO has died down, I would like >> to call a VOTE >> on

Re: [VOTE] Accept Pony Mail into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph > On May 23, 2016, at 10:56 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > Since it seems the discussion has died down, I am now calling a vote on > accepting Pony Mail into the Incubator. Sorry in advance for potato. > > This vote will run for the usual 72 hours. > >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Gossip into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph > On Apr 25, 2016, at 11:14 AM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote: > > Following the discussion thread [1], I would like to call a VOTE to accept > Gossip into the Apache Incubator. > > The Gossip proposal can be found here [2] and is also listed below. > > [ ] +1

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Sentry

+1 (binding) Ralph > On Feb 24, 2016, at 12:20 PM, Sravya Tirukkovalur wrote: > > Hi all, > > Following the positive discussion[1] and vote[2] in the Sentry > community and a discussion[3] on the incubator list to graduate > Sentry, I am calling a VOTE to graduate the

Re: Help for the Log4cxx podling

I have to point out that all of this is exactly why the project moved to the incubator from the logging project. While all the logging projects are obviously related by what they do, the language and implementation differences make it difficult for committers to cross over from one project to

Re: Impala commit policy

Virtually any project you look at is going to have portions that are fairly complex and portions that are pretty straightforward. In my opinion the correct approach is to identify the parts of the code that a) seem to be most susceptible to bugs, b) are hard to understand well, or c) where

Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Henry Robinson <he...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> ... >>>> Binding -1s (4): >>>>Greg Stein >>>>Ralph Goers >>>>Roman Shaposhnik >>>>Konstantin Boudnik ... >>> >>>

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

Sorry Jim. As an attempt to shut down a thread, this wasn't a very good one. Not a single poster in this thread has a problem with the word, or the concept of, "review". It is the process that is the issue and what the impact of that process is upon a community. Ralph > On Nov 26, 2015, at

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

> On Nov 25, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Todd Lipcon wrote: > > Isn't it an issue of scalability? With pre-commit code reviews, typically > the uploader of the code will pick out one or two people to review the code > who know the area well. Or, if no one is picked by the submitter of

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

1. What makes you think all bugs are caught during code reviews (they aren’t)? 2. What makes you think that code reviews after the commit are any less thorough than reviews required before the commit? If you don’t trust your community to do code reviews after you commit then there is a problem

Re: [VOTE] Accept Impala into the Apache Incubator

-1 (binding) I’d like to see the project start with CTR and use RTC only for specific cases (like where tests must be modified, over X (1000 lines?) of code added, etc. Ralph > On Nov 24, 2015, at 2:03 PM, Henry Robinson wrote: > > Hi - > > The [DISCUSS] thread has been

Re: [VOTE] Accept Kudu into the Apache Incubator

-1 (binding) I’d like to see the project start with CTR and use RTC only for specific cases (like where tests must be modified, over X (1000 lines?) of code added, etc. I must say I do find the part about achieving quality through automation attractive, but following that up with requiring RTC

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

Yes, it would be good to take a survey. Interestingly, I wasn’t aware that ANY Apache projects used RTC until I became involved with a project in the Hadoop ecosystem, which seems to align with Tood’s statement since all the projects he is listed as being involved in are part of that. In

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

A combination approach seems like it would be the best to me. Is the process you guys use documented? As I said, the part that bothers me with the way RTC is done in the project I am involved in is that I can’t commit my own stuff. Ralph > On Nov 20, 2015, at 6:09 AM, Jim Jagielski

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

And there is another problem I have. Maybe it isn’t true of all projects, but the one I am involved with says the author can’t commit his own code. So the commit logs will not reflect who actually authored the code but who reviewed it. I could probably tolerate RTC if I had to have the commit

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

; Some projects use the git Signed-off-by field in the commit log to >> differentiate the author from the reviewer. >> >> --Chris Nauroth >> >> >> >> >> On 11/19/15, 10:58 AM, "Ralph Goers" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

e grant full access and PMC membership simultaneously). We don't > need a fancy label for "contributor who is a committer" because such a > concept is anathema to the Subversion community's peer respect model. > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslext

Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sentry...)

None of your statements below are any different between RTC or CTR. The only time it makes aa difference is if no one does reviews. My feeling is that a community that insists on RTC believes that code will not be reviewed unless committers are forced to do it. All I can say, is that for me

Re: Concerning Sentry: A disagreement over the Apache Way and graduation

And I have to disagree with you Joe. To me, a mandatory RTC policy says “we don’t trust anybody”. Sure, it doesn’t discriminate, but it is also a PITA. One project I mentored uses RTC along with ReviewBoard and mandates that you cannot commit your own work and every commit must be formally

Re: [VOTE] Accept Eagle into Apache Incubation

+1 (binding) Ralph > On Oct 23, 2015, at 7:11 AM, Manoharan, Arun wrote: > > Hello Everyone, > > Thanks for all the feedback on the Eagle Proposal. > > I would like to call for a [VOTE] on Eagle joining the ASF as an incubation > project. > > The vote is open for 72

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Is there something else going on that I am not aware of? Is someone using undue influence where they shouldn’t be? On the Legal list dealing with hypothetical situations is continually avoided. While a code of conduct for mentors might make sense, penalizing mentors who are trying to educate

Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly

I am in the same boat as Alex with regard to QT, but Apache Pivot also has a similar goal. Ralph > On Sep 7, 2015, at 9:43 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > > Apologies if I’m way off base here as I’m not familiar with Corinthia or > QT Editor. If Corinthia were to develop the

Re: [NOTICE] corinthia PPMC+committer -= dortef, franz, gbg, ianc, jani, louis, pmkelly

Licensing is always a thorny issue. In general, http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional says that you can use libraries under licenses such as the LGPL for optional dependencies. This is so that user’s can use your project in

Re: Wiki access

The userid is RalphGoers. Ralph On Aug 4, 2015, at 5:41 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: For some reason I am not able to edit any pages on the incubator wiki. I could swear I used to be able

Re: apache binary distributions

On Aug 5, 2015, at 5:44 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Jochen Theodorou blackd...@gmx.org wrote: It was also mentioned here, that for example publishing snapshot

Wiki access

For some reason I am not able to edit any pages on the incubator wiki. I could swear I used to be able to do that. Does someone have karma to fix this? Ralph - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [IP CLEARANCE] HornetQ code grant

Actually, if you look at the CCLA you will see that you can also do a software grant with it. Ralph On Jul 4, 2015, at 11:58 PM, Niclas Hedhman nic...@hedhman.org wrote: AFAIK, a CCLA from RedHat is not the correct agreement. It should have been a Software Grant. CCLA is acknowledgement

Re: Licensing Issue

While this is all true, there is a key point in the policy that should be considered [1]. “Will the majority of users want to use my product without adding the optional components”? So if a Language Module is required and BerkeleyLM is so substandard that no one will really use it, then

Re: [VOTE] Accept Freemarker into Apache Incubator

: Evangelia Dendramis Sponsors Champion Jacopo Cappellato Nominated Mentors • David E. Jones - Apache Member • Jacopo Cappellato - Apache Member • Jean-Frederic Clere - Incubator PMC • Ralph Goers - Incubator PMC • Sergio Fernández - Incubator PMC Sponsoring Entity We

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

then I suppose my question can be reduced to: After the voting has concluded with positive result (for entering incubation), when must we migrate the source code to ASF? -- Thanks, Daniel Dekany Wednesday, June 3, 2015, 2:05:57 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: IMO, once the source code

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

I would proceed with the plan that the project will succeed in graduating. Usually project names stay with the ASF. I am not sure what the policy would be for a project that failed to graduate. I would suspect the project could keep it after leaving. However, if the project fails to graduate

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

IMO, once the source code is migrated to the ASF you should not do any more releases outside the ASF. I would attempt to clear up as many IP issues as you can before entering but I believe several projects have resolved their IP issues while in the incubator. In the worst case some code may

Re: [VOTE] Accept Mysos into the Apache Incubator

+1 Ralph On May 28, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Jake Farrell jfarr...@apache.org wrote: Based on the earlier discussion in thread [1], I would like to call a VOTE to accept Mysos, an Apache Mesos framework for running MySQL instances, as a new Apache Incubator project. The proposal is available

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

into incubation if failure is the most probable outcome. Can the requirements for getting out from incubation successfully be quantified? For the kind of project like this? -- Thanks, Daniel Dekany Friday, May 22, 2015, 2:44:03 AM, Ralph Goers wrote: I used to use Apache Velocity

Re: [DISCUSS] Freemarker Incubation proposal

I used to use Apache Velocity. However, it hasn’t had a release since 2010 and the overall project activity has been minimal for years. As a consequence of that, and a feature that was missing, I recently switched to using Freemarker for some templating work I needed to do. The only reason I

Re: [VOTE] Accept Taverna into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph On Oct 16, 2014, at 12:42 PM, Andy Seaborne a...@apache.org wrote: On 16/10/14 18:47, sebb wrote: Apart from the typo, I thought it was necessary for the VOTE thread to contain the full text of the proposal. This has been the case for (almost) all previous acceptance

Re: [VOTE] Accept Apache BeanShell in the Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph On Jun 3, 2013, at 6:02 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (398J) wrote: +1 (binding). Cheers, Chris ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office:

Re: [VOTE] Apache Spark for the Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph On Jun 7, 2013, at 10:34 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (398J) wrote: Hi Folks, OK discussion has died down, time to VOTE to accept Spark into the Apache Incubator. I'll let the VOTE run for at least a week. So far I've heard +1s from the following folks, so no need for them

Re: [VOTE] Accept Apache BeanShell in the Incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph On May 24, 2013, at 12:23 AM, Simone Tripodi wrote: Dear ASF members, We would like to propose BeanShell for the incubator. The proposal draft is available at: https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BeanShellProposal, follows below the proposal Open is open for at

Re: [VOTE] Accept Marmotta into the incubator

+1 (binding) Ralph On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:28 AM, Andy Seaborne wrote: Hi there, Following the discussion thread, here is the formal vote on the Marmotta proposal: Please cast your votes on whether to accept the Apache Marmotta proposal: [ ] +1 Accept Marmotta into the Apache

Re: [VOTE] Accept Apache Streams as an Incubator Project

+1 (binding) Ralph On Nov 14, 2012, at 4:37 AM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote: Given the feedback received so far I think the Streams proposal is in good shape so I am calling for a vote to accept Streams into the Incubator. The proposal is at:

Re: [VOTE] Retire AWF from incubation

+1 (binding) Ralph On Jul 4, 2012, at 2:18 PM, Roger Schildmeijer wrote: Hi, The AWF community has voted to retire the project. Following the retirement guide [1], I now call the Incubator PMC to vote on confirming this decision. (Will be open for 72 hours). [ ] +1 Retire the AWF

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

sure how to vote. Ralph On Jun 5, 2012, at 6:49 AM, Alan Gates wrote: On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:19 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Another way of looking at these same statistics: Cloudera - 217 Other - 16

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

on. Patrick On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: The graduation requirements say The project is considered to have a diverse community when it is not highly dependent on any single contributor (there are at least 3 legally independent

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:22 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote: Based on some digging, I think what you are mostly facing is a battle of perception. As not everyone has read or is privy to the private list discussions, what they see is that you have a standing -1 vote from a mentor who has

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On Jun 5, 2012, at 4:10 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi, On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: I posted an email earlier today where I discussed my confusion over the diversity requirement. I'm not comfortable doing anything without getting some

Re: diversity

: On Jun 5, 2012, at 2:45 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: I posted an email earlier today where I discussed my confusion over the diversity requirement. I'm not comfortable doing anything without getting some feedback on whether the diversity requirement, as currently stated on the wiki, is correct

Re: [VOTE] Graduate Flume podling from Apache Incubator

* Mike Percy mpe...@apache.org * Mingjie Laim...@apache.org * Nick Verbeck nerdyn...@apache.org * Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org * Prasad Mujumdarpras...@apache.org * Ralph

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Parser

My initial reaction is that there may be some confusion between this project and Commons Configuration, at least from a naming standpoint. However, I don't believe Commons Configuration currently supports this format of configuration. Ralph On May 30, 2012, at 11:18 PM, Seungyoung Kim wrote:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Apache Parser

On May 31, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Greg Stein wrote: On May 31, 2012 5:31 AM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: ... (that said, I agree: this seems like it should be a proposal to Commons, so we just need to handle that redirection) And I didn't read the proposal closely enough, but took from

Re: JIRA and communities

On May 28, 2012, at 6:57 AM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote: -Original Message- From: Benson Margulies [mailto:bimargul...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2012 10:51 AM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: JIRA and communities So, what message here should the incubator

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 26, 2012, at 9:29 PM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: Hi Jukka, On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote: IIUC Flume operates under an RTC model where people are not supposed to commit their own changes, which obviously makes the above data less

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

. Roy On May 26, 2012, at 11:44 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: On May 26, 2012, at 9:29 PM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: Hi Jukka, On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.comwrote: IIUC Flume operates under an RTC model where people

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 26, 2012, at 10:11 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote: At this point my recommendations are: 1. Since the PPMC voted to separate being a committer and being a PMC member I would wait a couple of months

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 25, 2012, at 2:46 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote: On May 24, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: There are four companies represented in this list: AVG Technologies, Cloudera, CyberAgent

Re: JIRA and communities

On May 25, 2012, at 8:37 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Steve Loughran steve.lough...@gmail.com wrote: On 24 May 2012 06:15, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: I've met other groups of people who like a JIRA centric view of the world. I suspect

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 25, 2012, at 11:03 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: That leaves just me as the only non-Cloudera PPMC member who actively participates and I don't commit code and I've been on the PPMC primarily as a mentor. If you somehow believe that this constitutes diversity than my job as a mentor

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 23, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: On May 23, 2012, at 10:15 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Right after I read

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 23, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:36 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: On May 23, 2012, at 10:15 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Right after I read

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

needs to remain in the incubator until we develop greater diversity, that's fine too. If we're not ready, we're just not ready. On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote: On May 23, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:36

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 24, 2012, at 10:40 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote: Hi, On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.comwrote: The ONLY issue I see for Flume to graduate is diversity. No one will convince me that the current makeup constitutes diversity of any kind

Re: June reports in two weeks

Jukka, since the last report I have changed my opinion a bit and recommend you add Flume to the low diversity list. Ralph On May 23, 2012, at 4:28 PM, Jukka Zitting wrote: Hi all, There's plenty of time still before the June reports [1] start flowing in. As an early remainder to podlings

Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

Right after I read Jukka's email that started this thread and I posted my reply and discovered to my shock that they had started a graduation vote. I am shocked because I have pointed out repeatedly the project's complete lack of diversity. Virtually all the active PMC members and committers

Re: Flume Graduation (was Re: June reports in two weeks)

On May 23, 2012, at 10:15 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: Right after I read Jukka's email that started this thread and I posted my reply and discovered to my shock that they had started a graduation vote. I am

Re: [VOTE] Let the retired Zeta Components project keep their name

Why does the IPMC need to vote on this? I don't see it as part of the list below of things the trademarks committee requires. Ralph On May 14, 2012, at 5:30 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote: Hello, Zeta Components has been retired and the committers want to go to github with the project.

Re: [VOTE] retire zeta components from incubation

+1 (binding) Ralph On May 3, 2012, at 1:12 AM, Julien Vermillard wrote: Hi, As discussed earlier the Zeta components community has voted to retire the project. Following the retirement guide [1], I now call the Incubator PMC to vote on confirming this decision. This vote is open for the

Re: [VOTE] CloudStack for Apache Incubator

+1 binding Ralph On Apr 9, 2012, at 6:32 PM, Kevin Kluge wrote: Hi All. I'd like to call for a VOTE for CloudStack to enter the Incubator. The proposal is available at [1] and I have also included it below. Please vote with: +1: accept CloudStack into Incubator +0: don't care -1: do

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.1.0-incubating (rc1)

Thanks, Matt. That provides the 3 IPMC votes required. Ralph On Mar 25, 2012, at 3:37 PM, Matt Hogstrom wrote: Compiled, verified checksums, review notices and spot checked source for licenses. +1 (binding) Matt Hogstrom m...@hogstrom.org A Day Without Nuclear Fusion Is a Day

  1   2   3   >