Thanks Ant - our dev list agrees that we should be adding some information
about what is being updated - we will include this in future releases.
With that, we have 3 votes we need, we appreciate your guy's time in revewing
our release.
~Prescott
--
Thanks everyone for the feedback. This is very constructive and helpful. We
will try to roll out a new RC accordingly.
We are grateful for all the help that we got from Apache members and are
proud to be part of Apache.
Jun
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:05 PM, ant elder wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 27, 20
On Nov 28, 2011, at 12:51 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback, I still have some questions.
>
> 1. Alan, this nunit license acknowledgement is missing from the NOTICE file
> since RC1 and RC1 had the nunit files. Since cutting RCs is a significant
> time investment, we'd appreciat
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:12 PM, David Crossley wrote:
> I cannot understand why people are confused on those points.
Empathy is hard when you've forgotten what it was like to learn the
topic. There is a lot of documentation, but it is not curated. To
apprehend the topic, one has to read the foun
On 29 November 2011 00:12, David Crossley wrote:
> When Apache Forrest became a TLP, just prior to the Incubator starting,
> there were no mentors to tell me stuff.
HeHe - and that's exactly where I learned it - although I was lucky
enough to have mentors within the project. That's one reason why
Search for the two words: release veto
A top hit is http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
It has been that way for a long time.
It is the Release Manager who decides whether to halt a release.
They are guided by +1/-1 votes.
I cannot understand why people are confused on thos
The Apache Geronimo project has received a contribution which updates a number
of Geronimo dependencies and associated code updates.
The code contributions have been attached to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-6217
I've committed the IP Clearance form to the Incubator website --
On 11/28/2011 3:19 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
On Nov 28, 2011, at 11:21 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
No - nobody can veto a release. But you also can't slip in a vetoed patch
and say "this is a release vote, its not subject to veto". Well, as I had
hinted, the RM can withdraw a vote, which
Hereby I would like to mark this vote closed with the following result:
4 IPMC +1 votes (Benson, Martijn, Chris A, Alan)
4 PPMC +1 votes (Francis, Rainer, Benjamin, Eike)
1 community +1 vote (Dimitar)
no -1 or +0 votes
Combined with our empire-db-dev@ vote round we can conclude this vote
success
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 2:50 AM, sebb wrote:
> In which case, I suggest you post a clean message requesting feedback,
> as this thread does not appear to be the right place for this now.
The link was to the last RC. -C
-
To unsu
Suggestion:
There are cases where the 'official word' is a full-ASF document which
we don't lightly edit. Yet, we see some evidence that podlings have
trouble reaching the right interpretation.
We don't want to duplicate, but we could supplement.
Specific proposal: I'm willing to try to write a
Thanks Alan for summarizing the issues!
>> We can perform all the other suggestions in a subsequent release.
Sebb also had a suggestion about release candidate tags. The kafka
community had discussed this and felt that creating a release tag is more
convenient to do when a vote passes. Until then
On Nov 28, 2011, at 11:21 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 11/28/2011 1:00 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
That is because, every single time, the RM agreed that the release
was worth re-cutting.
>>
>> We have been assuming that it is the rule of Apache to cut another RC even
>> if it gets
On Nov 28, 2011, at 9:51 AM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback, I still have some questions.
>
> 1. Alan, this nunit license acknowledgement is missing from the NOTICE file
> since RC1 and RC1 had the nunit files. Since cutting RCs is a significant
> time investment, we'd appreciate
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Dear Apache members,
>
> Over the past 2 months, the Kafka Apache incubator project has been trying
> to release its very first version in Apache. After 7 RCs, we are still not
> done. Part of this is because most of us are new to the Apache releas
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Nov 28, 2011 7:01 PM, "Neha Narkhede" wrote:
>
> >> That is because, every single time, the RM agreed that the release
> was worth re-cutting.
>
> We have been assuming that it is the rule of Apache to cut another RC even
> if it ge
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:56:59PM -0600, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> A majority of +1's over -1's is required, obviously :)
That would be sane, but that's not how I read this passage:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
Votes on whether a package is ready to be re
On 11/28/2011 1:00 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
That is because, every single time, the RM agreed that the release
was worth re-cutting.
We have been assuming that it is the rule of Apache to cut another RC even
if it gets a single -1 vote.
And that isn't correct, as Joe was kind enough to point
>> That is because, every single time, the RM agreed that the release
was worth re-cutting.
We have been assuming that it is the rule of Apache to cut another RC even
if it gets a single -1 vote.
>> A majority of +1's over -1's is required, obviously :)
Although this seems reasonable, do people
On 11/27/2011 3:34 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
I think I've been leading a sheltered existence. In the TLPs of which
I play a part, over the 5 years or so that I've been around, I've
never seen a release proceed past a -1. Every single time, a -1 has
led to recutting the release.
That is becaus
Thanks for the feedback, I still have some questions.
1. Alan, this nunit license acknowledgement is missing from the NOTICE file
since RC1 and RC1 had the nunit files. Since cutting RCs is a significant
time investment, we'd appreciate if you could list all the concerns you
have once.
2. Sebb, i
Hello,
as I intend to step down as a mentor from Zeta Components, there are
only two mentors left. So this podling needs one more. Who is willing
to help out?
Cheers
Christian
--
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de
On 28 November 2011 11:40, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:23 PM, sebb wrote:
>> ...Assuming this goes ahead in some form:
>>
>> Do we want to list both the initial champion (prior to acceptance) and
>> the current champion (during incubation; may be the same)?
>>
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:23 PM, sebb wrote:
> ...Assuming this goes ahead in some form:
>
> Do we want to list both the initial champion (prior to acceptance) and
> the current champion (during incubation; may be the same)?
>
> Or should we just list the current (incubation) champion?...
I
As people may have seen, I added a entry to podlings.xml.
In the case of current podlings only, the entry is listed in the
sponsor column under the sponsor name.
The entries were extracted from the podling status files that listed
their champion (not all do), and hopefully gradually completed by
On 28 November 2011 02:56, Chris Douglas wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
>> I think you missed a very important part of what I said, let me quote
>> the para you refer to:
> [snip]
>> My point is we can't expect the mentors to type everything over and
>> over again
Hello all,
I urgently need to remove some of my workload. Therefore I have
decided remove myself from any political debattes of the ASF. In
addition I have currently less fun in mentoring projects and need to
step back or go to idle mode which is affecting the incubator.
I have told the ooo podli
The vote passes. We received three binding +1 votes.
No other votes were received.
The following people voted:
+1 Benson Margulies (on opennlp-dev list)
+1 Tommaso Teofili
+1 Stefan Bodewig
Thanks for voting!
Jörn
On 11/19/11 6:00 PM, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
Hi all,
please review and vote on ap
Looks ok to me. In future releases it might be good to consider
including a release notes type file that mentions whats been updated
in the release.
+1
...ant
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 10:29 PM, Prescott Nasser wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We could use another vote or two,
>
> Thanks!
>
> -P
>
> Sent
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:04 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> I suggest we discuss documentation work right here. It will be a welcome
> change to discuss our work instead of simply our opinions.
+1
I would like to suggest to adopt an existing release plan, change it
to fit to incubator expectations an
30 matches
Mail list logo
