Fixing Schedule, was Re: Incubator PMC/Board report for December 2010 (nuvem-...@incubator.apache.org)

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:00 AM, wrote: > Dear Nuvem Developers, > > This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator > PMC. > It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly > board report. > > The board meeting is scheduled for  Wed, 15

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

I'm of course +1. Regards Santiago On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 7:52 AM, Dan Peterson wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Please vote on the acceptance of Wave into the Apache incubator. > > The proposal is available at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/WaveProposal > (for your convenience, a snapshot is also

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

Hey David, When the time period is up, I'll tally the vote and send a message with [RESULTS] in the subject. -Dan - Original Message - From: David Wang To: general@incubator.apache.org Sent: Thu Dec 02 00:02:27 2010 Subject: Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator On the expiry of

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

On the expiry of the 72 hours, where would we be able to hear the outcome of the acceptance? On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Eelco Hillenius wrote: > +1 Accept Wave for incubation > > (non-binding) > > Eelco > > - > To unsubscri

Setting up the Jena podling

Ross, I hope I didn't jump the gun, but I've gone ahead and created JIRA issues to request infrastructure setup for Apache Jena (incubating). Here's the parent issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-3255 I think next steps are to collect desired user IDs and ICLA's for all new com

Re: I think individuals need SGAs

Hi Benson, I didn't see your edit. I might not be subscribed to the right list (yet). You are right. A pre-existing code base is not covered by an ICLA. A grant is needed. Craig On Dec 1, 2010, at 2:15 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: I've been thinking about Leo's email of the other day, a

Is there a batch of new accounts on the horizon, oh r...@?

Sometimes I know that the very busy root@ batches up account requests. My OpenNLP pod-people wonder when they might get their accounts. I've counselled patience. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org F

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

+1 (non-binding) -- Alain Levesque Wavewatchers

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

+1 Accept Wave for incubation (non-binding) Eelco - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

I think individuals need SGAs

I've been thinking about Leo's email of the other day, and I think that my edit to the mentor page is not right and some guidance I've delivered to podlings is not right. I'd like to float my logic here and see how it gets shot at. As Leo pointed out, the CCLA has a specific section for granting

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: Owen O'Malley > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 12:15:51 PM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > > On Dec 1, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > > > It is common for podling

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: Bertrand Delacretaz > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 2:18:50 PM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > Hi Chris, > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) > wrote: >

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hi Chris, On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 7:42 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > Hey Joe, > > I agree with pretty much everything you said below. One good thing (and > correct me if I'm wrong) but is that I interpret what you are saying here: > >> This is not an academic question.  Ask Dims how thing

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 1:42:47 PM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > Hey Joe, > > I agree with pretty much everything you said below. One good

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hey Joe, I agree with pretty much everything you said below. One good thing (and correct me if I'm wrong) but is that I interpret what you are saying here: > This is not an academic question. Ask Dims how things worked for > Geronimo when they had such a dependency. Basically the expectation >

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Thilo, the point is that any mentor, champion or in other form involved ASF member MUST NOT give his +1 to any incubator RELEASE vote which is not IP clear! It might be that incubator snapshots are not IP cleared yet, but there is certainly a much higher grade of review in any incubator _relea

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 1:14:03 PM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > Hi Joe, > > >> than going to some other OSS provider and then coming he

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

+1 also when considering the other options. Some of those incubator projects are JSR impls. And would you like to depend on a LGPL licensed external library instead? LieGrue, strub --- On Wed, 12/1/10, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > From: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) > Subject: Re: Basing A

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hi Joe, >> than going to some other OSS provider and then coming here >> later. > > You're confused about the whole point of releases at Apache. > They aren't necessarily meant to offer any promises about > stability or suitability for a given purpose, they are simply > meant as a means of get

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Just about the most important thing a podling does is release. We shouldn't need mechanisms to ease the use of unreleased podling code. In my opinion. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For addition

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 12:36:19 PM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > I guess if I could boil down my position to a single sentence it would be:

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hey Thilo, >> > > Is it just me, or have we come full circle ;-) > LOL, yep! >> >> >>> We're doing a code grant, ICLAs from all current >>> and previous contributors, etc etc, the whole nine yards. The >>> fact that the code is already under the Apache license makes hardly >>> any differen

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hi Chris, On 12/1/2010 18:08, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > Hi Thilo, > >>> >>> I hear ya, and I believe you have way more experience in this particular >>> area than I do. I'm just saying that it would be nice if we could eat our >>> own dog food in this particular accord, otherwise, what'

RE: Adding myself as a mentor for Stonehenge

+1 -Original Message- From: Gianugo Rabellino [mailto:gian...@rabellino.it] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 12:09 PM To: stonehenge-...@incubator.apache.org Cc: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Adding myself as a mentor for Stonehenge Hi there, as the stonehenge community is about

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hey Joe, > > >> But OTOH, it would be nice if we could reward Incubator podlings for >> choosing to do it the "Apache Way" to begin with by making some sort >> of easier mechanism for their code to be included in other Apache projects, >> right? After all the discussion about making it easier

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

On Dec 1, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: It is common for podlings to import their code here and only then start cleaning up dependencies that do not comply with ASF requirements. So if another project release contains unreleased code from a podling, it might not be clean. In ge

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 11:56:49 AM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > Hey Joe, > > >> > >> Hrm, umm, so what's the difference between this,

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hi Thilo, >> >> I hear ya, and I believe you have way more experience in this particular >> area than I do. I'm just saying that it would be nice if we could eat our >> own dog food in this particular accord, otherwise, what's the Incubator >> other than an Apache-branded area of code that's s

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

On 12/1/2010 17:56, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > Hey Joe, > >>> >>> Hrm, umm, so what's the difference between this, and oh I don't know, >>> some other library I pick up as a TLP off Google code who claims their >>> source is ASLv2 licensed? I have no guarantee over there that the license

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hi Bertrand, >> >> The difference is that the incubator code comes from >> Apache, with all the ASF IP due diligence. If we use >> a third-party library that's under the AL, we mention >> that it's not from Apache. Our customers can then >> decide for themselves how much they trust that other >

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hey Joe, >> >> Hrm, umm, so what's the difference between this, and oh I don't know, >> some other library I pick up as a TLP off Google code who claims their >> source is ASLv2 licensed? I have no guarantee over there that the license >> issues are resolved either, yet we do that all the tim

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Thilo Götz wrote: > On 12/1/2010 17:38, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: >>... Hrm, umm, so what's the difference between this, and oh I don't know, >>some other library I pick up as a TLP off Google code who claims their source >>is ASLv2 licensed? I have no guara

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hi Thilo, > The difference is that the incubator code comes from > Apache, with all the ASF IP due diligence. If we use > a third-party library that's under the AL, we mention > that it's not from Apache. Our customers can then > decide for themselves how much they trust that other > source. My

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 11:38:31 AM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > On Dec 1, 2010, at 8:04 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote: > > > - Original Mes

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

On 12/1/2010 17:38, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: > On Dec 1, 2010, at 8:04 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote: > >> - Original Message >> >>> From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" >>> To: "general@incubator.apache.org" >>> Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 10:57:48 AM >>> Subject: Re: Basing Apache release

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

On Dec 1, 2010, at 8:04 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote: > - Original Message > >> From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" >> To: "general@incubator.apache.org" >> Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 10:57:48 AM >> Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects >> >> Hi Owen, >> >>

Re: i want to vote on wave project for Incubator

Hi Alain... Please reply on the voting thread of Wave :). On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:30 PM, Alain Levesque wrote: > I want to vote on wave project for incubator > > -- > Alain Levesque Wavewatchers > -- Thanks - Mohammad Nour   Author of (WebSphere Application Server Community Edition 2.0 U

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" > To: "general@incubator.apache.org" > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 10:57:48 AM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > Hi Owen, > > It's my understanding that Apache software can depend on oth

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: Benson Margulies > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 10:53:35 AM > Subject: Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > I agree with Joe. > > a) I've been involved in a number of such releases. > > b) A p

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

Hi Owen, It's my understanding that Apache software can depend on other software that falls within the guidelines here [1]. ASF Podlings, by definition are software (released or not) that fall under the confines of Category A from [1], so it's fine to depend on them (again, *released* or not).

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

On 12/1/2010 16:48, Owen O'Malley wrote: > In http://bit.ly/fhCxIt , Steve argued that it isn't permitted for non-podling > releases to depend on the artifacts that come out of podlings. I believe that > to > be false, but I can't find a relevant statement in the FAQ. Can I get > clarification? T

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

I agree with Joe. a) I've been involved in a number of such releases. b) A podling can be evaluated for license compatibility like any external dependency -- but I don't see how a podling has any business making any releases before their IP clearance is pretty darn clear. --benson On Wed, Dec

Re: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

- Original Message > From: Owen O'Malley > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Wed, December 1, 2010 10:48:48 AM > Subject: Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects > > In http://bit.ly/fhCxIt , Steve argued that it isn't permitted for > non-podling releases to

Basing Apache releases on releases from incubating projects

In http://bit.ly/fhCxIt , Steve argued that it isn't permitted for non- podling releases to depend on the artifacts that come out of podlings. I believe that to be false, but I can't find a relevant statement in the FAQ. Can I get clarification? Thanks, Owen -

RE: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator (CORRECTION)

Corrected: +1 Non-binding Mark R. Kovacevich Voice: 404-502-9268 Email: mark.r.kovacev...@gmail.com -Original Message- From: Mark Kovacevich [mailto:mark.r.kovacev...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 3:47 PM To: general@inc

Incubator PMC/Board report for December 2010 (general@incubator.apache.org)

Dear Jena Developers, This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator PMC. It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly board report. The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 15 December 2010, 12 pm Pacific. The report for your pod

Incubator PMC/Board report for December 2010 (general@incubator.apache.org)

Dear OpenNLP Developers, This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator PMC. It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly board report. The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 15 December 2010, 12 pm Pacific. The report for your

Re: Accept Wave into the incubator

Wave +1 (non-binding) -- Chris iotawave.org Singapore

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

+1 ---> the acceptance of Wave into the Apache incubator.

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

+1 Wave never die. On 30 November 2010 15:52, Dan Peterson wrote: > Hi everyone, > Please vote on the acceptance of Wave into the Apache incubator. > The proposal is available at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/WaveProposal > (for your convenience, a snapshot is also copied below) > The earlie

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

+1 On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:30 PM, David Wang wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Yasushi Ando wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> Wave never die. >> >> On 30 November 2010 15:52, Dan Peterson wrote: >> > Hi everyone, >> > Please vote on the acceptance of Wave into the Apache incubator. >> > The

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

[X ] +1 Accept Wave for incubation On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 07:52, Dan Peterson wrote: > Hi everyone, > Please vote on the acceptance of Wave into the Apache incubator. > The proposal is available at: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/WaveProposal > (for your convenience, a snapshot is also copied

Re: Accept Wave into the incubator

+1 On 12月1日, 午後1:24, Andrian Kurniady wrote: > +1 > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:30 PM, David Wang wrote: > > +1 > > > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Yasushi Ando wrote: > > >> +1 > > >> Wave never die. > > >> On 30 November 2010 15:52, Dan Peterson wrote: > >> > Hi everyone, > >> >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Wave into the incubator

[X] +1 Accept Wave for incubation non-binding --Honza