If you identified the public places and were more specific about it, it would
help us to clean it up as appropriate.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Nick Kew [mailto:n...@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 22:03
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: References to "Apache Ope
I've seen a couple of recent references to "Apache OpenOffice" appearing
in public places. Places for which Apache committers are responsible.
Have I missed a graduation, or a change in practice concerning use of
the Apache trademark in the context of incubating projects?
--
Nick Kew
-
Alan,
I found the list of jars that you published during the 0.7.0 release. The
new jars in the 0.7.1 release are the following:
commons-cli: AL2
commons-el: AL2
commons-net: AL2
commons-io: AL2
commons-compress: AL2
core: Eclipse Public License 1.0
hsqldb: BSD
jasper-compiler: AL2
jasper-runtime:
On Jun 22, 2012, at 3:16 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
> Alan-
>
> Please recheck your results using the 0.7.0 release and not your email
> archives to make sure your process is consistent. Please also let us
> know how you're composing your list so your concerns are reproducible.
> We can't be chasi
Alan-
Please recheck your results using the 0.7.0 release and not your email
archives to make sure your process is consistent. Please also let us
know how you're composing your list so your concerns are reproducible.
We can't be chasing ghosts.
Your memory of the 0.7.0 release is dissimilar to my
On Jun 22, 2012, at 3:13 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Alan D. Cabrera
> wrote:
>> This is why documenting transitive dependencies is so dangerous.
>
> Should we stop?
No. The solution is that projects should control their dependencies
(direct/transitive) so
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> This is why documenting transitive dependencies is so dangerous.
Should we stop?
Marvin Humphrey
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For
You would think so but that is not the case. Simply compare my old email
against what you get now.
Regards,
Alan
On Jun 22, 2012, at 11:49 AM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Alan,
>
> Shouldn't we always get the same set of jars after build from the 0.7.0
> release, whether it's done when 0.7.0 was vote
Alan,
Shouldn't we always get the same set of jars after build from the 0.7.0
release, whether it's done when 0.7.0 was voted or now?
Thanks,
Jun
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> This is why documenting transitive dependencies is so dangerous. The set
> of jars that
On Jun 22, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 10:44 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> If this is going to be a new hard requirement the people who feel strongly
>> about this should add something to Rat or write some kind of a plugin.
>
> Check out the rece
This is why documenting transitive dependencies is so dangerous. The set of
jars that I got last year is much different. This list from last year is what
was voted upon. You need to compare the 0.7.1 list of jars against what I
presented last year. You can hunt down that old email using the
Alan,
Here is what I did. I built the 0.7.0 release and the 0.7.1 release.
Extract *.jar, sort them, and compare. I reached the same conclusion as
Joe: the only new jar is snappy. Other jar differences are all due to jar
upgrades (are you referring to those?). Could you list any other completely
n
On Jun 22, 2012, at 10:19 AM, Jakob Homan wrote:
> This release doesn't look different than the first Kafka release
> (snappy notwithstanding).
That's not true. There are a significant number of new jars.
> That was deemed acceptable and so without a
> lot of new directives, which don't see
This release doesn't look different than the first Kafka release
(snappy notwithstanding). That was deemed acceptable and so without a
lot of new directives, which don't seem to be clear here, so should
this one.
Binding +1 on RC3.
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 8:24 AM, Jun Rao wrote:
> Alan,
>
> I c
+1 (non-binding)
Sander
OSS Watch - supporting open source in education and research
http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk
> -Original Message-
> From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com]
> Sent: 21 June 2012 17:35
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [VOTE] [PROPOSAL] Allura to enter
On Jun 21, 2012, at 10:44 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
> +1
>
> If this is going to be a new hard requirement the people who feel strongly
> about this should add something to Rat or write some kind of a plugin.
Check out the recent 0.3 Airavata release. I didn't review it, until just now.
Howe
On Jun 21, 2012, at 6:33 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>>> If a project has a gazillion dependencies, regardless of whether those
>>> dependencies are direct or transitive, that makes dealing with licensing
>>> more
>>> challenging, but it do
+1. (binding)
On Jun 21, 2012, at 9:34 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would
> like to request that the IPMC votes on this issue. The requisite 72 hours has
> passed since the initial proposal.
>
> The proposal may be found a
Rich Bowen wrote on Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 11:17:24 -0400:
>
> On Jun 22, 2012, at 11:09 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>
> >>
> >>
> >> +1, binding this time. :)
> >
> > Wrong, it's still not binding.
>
>
> Ah. Sorry. I assumed that since the board had ack'ed the addition, it
> was. But, yeah, it l
+1 (binding)
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
> From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)"
> To: ""
> Cc:
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 4:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] [PROPOSAL] Allura to enter the Incubator
>
> +1 (binding).
>
> Good luck!
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 9:
Alan,
I compared all dependent jars in 0.7.1 with 0.7.0. Other than upgrades, the
only added jar in 0.7.1 is the following.
./core/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/snappy-java-1.0.4.1.jar
Snappy is on Apache License 2.0. So, our licenses should be covered.
Thanks,
Jun
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9
On Jun 22, 2012, at 11:09 AM, Daniel Shahaf wrote:
>>
>>
>> +1, binding this time. :)
>
> Wrong, it's still not binding.
Ah. Sorry. I assumed that since the board had ack'ed the addition, it was. But,
yeah, it looks like my vote won't sway things one way or the other. :)
--
Rich Bowen
rbo
Daniel Shahaf wrote on Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 18:09:04 +0300:
> Rich Bowen wrote on Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:03:26 -0400:
> >
> > On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would
> > > like to reques
Rich Bowen wrote on Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 09:03:26 -0400:
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would
> > like to request that the IPMC votes on this issue. The requisite 72 hours
> > has passed
+1 (binding).
Good luck!
Cheers,
Chris
On Jun 21, 2012, at 9:34 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would
> like to request that the IPMC votes on this issue. The requisite 72 hours has
> passed since the initial proposal.
>
>
On Jun 22, 2012, at 7:05 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 10:46 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 21, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Marvin Humphrey
>>> wrote:
Obeying dependency license provisions is not an ASF pol
On Jun 21, 2012, at 10:46 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Marvin Humphrey
>> wrote:
>>> Obeying dependency license provisions is not an ASF policy, it's a legal
>>> requirement. Fairness is immaterial.
>>>
On Jun 21, 2012, at 8:42 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> Hi, Jun,
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Jun Rao wrote:
>> I agree that to the benefit of users, it would be reasonable for Apache
>> projects to include license/notice for all dependant jars (directly or
>> indirectly) in a release. Ho
On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would
> like to request that the IPMC votes on this issue. The requisite 72 hours has
> passed since the initial proposal.
>
> The proposal may be found at http://wiki
+1 (binding)
On 6/21/12 12:34 PM, "Rich Bowen" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would
>like to request that the IPMC votes on this issue. The requisite 72 hours
>has passed since the initial proposal.
>
>The proposal may be found at
>http://wiki.
Plus One
On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would
> like to request that the IPMC votes on this issue. The requisite 72 hours has
> passed since the initial proposal.
>
> The proposal may be found at ht
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 4:06 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>> Rich, I note you mark your vote as non-binding.
>>
>> To be a champion/mentor you need to be an IPMC member. Since you are
>> already an SF member you just need to ask and Jukka will sort
Hi Krishna,
This is a general Apache Incubator mailing lists, for project specific
questions, please direct your email to the corresponding mailing lists. You
want to send this email to oozie users mailing list [1].
Cheers,
Suresh
[1] - http://incubator.apache.org/oozie/MailingLists.html
O
Hi,
I'm getting the following error on rerunning an oozie job,
command:-
oozie job -oozie http://adserver-dev1:11000/oozie/ -config
/data/rendering/pull/render-job.properties -rerun
101-120503192956389-oozie-hado-W
Error: E0712 : E0712: Could not create lib paths list for application
[hdfs:/
Sorry, the subject should have contained [RESULT]
The vote has now closed. We received no additional votes but we
already had 3 +1 IPMC binding votes, so the vote is successful.
This is the fifth incubator release for Apache Wookie, with the
artifacts being versioned as 0.11.0-incubating
The vote has now closed. We received no additional votes but we already
had 3 +1 IPMC binding votes, so the vote is successful.
This is the fifth incubator release for Apache Wookie, with the
artifacts being versioned as 0.11.0-incubating.
We have received 3 +1 IPMC votes and 3 +1 PPMC vot
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> We are proposing Allura to be admitted to the Apache Incubator, and would
> like to request that the IPMC votes on this issue.
[x] +1 I recommend that Allura becomes an Apache Incubator project
FTR, I'm including the current state of th
37 matches
Mail list logo
