Re: [VOTE] Accept Ignite into the Apache Incubator

2014-09-27 Thread P. Taylor Goetz
+1 (non-binding) I think the technology has a lot to gain from moving to Apache. Initial committer list shows some diversity beyond GridGain, but as a podling they would likely want to work on further diversification. -Taylor > On Sep 27, 2014, at 8:58 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > > I wo

[VOTE] Accept Ignite into the Apache Incubator

2014-09-27 Thread Konstantin Boudnik
I would like to call a vote for accepting "Apache Ignite" for Apache Incubator. The full proposal is available below. We ask the IPMC to sponsor it, with cos as Champion, and stack, rvs, cos, hsaputra and brane volunteering to be Mentors. Please cast your vote: [ ] +1, bring Iginite into Incubato

Re: [VOTE] Apache DeviceMap Data 1.0.1 incubating

2014-09-27 Thread Marvin Humphrey
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Reza Naghibi > wrote: >> Generally, what are the options here for moving forward? Also, for future reference, consider using the "2013 Alternative Release Voting Process" for subsequent releases, which only requires one Mentor vote instead of three IPMC member

Re: [VOTE] Apache DeviceMap Data 1.0.1 incubating

2014-09-27 Thread Marvin Humphrey
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Reza Naghibi wrote: > So this release only got 2 of the 3 needed votes. Generally, what are the > options here for moving forward? Leave the vote open. There's precedent, and it would be really great to get a DeviceMap release out -- although we always recommend

Re: [VOTE] Apache DeviceMap Data 1.0.1 incubating

2014-09-27 Thread jan i
On 27 September 2014 17:31, Reza Naghibi wrote: > So this release only got 2 of the 3 needed votes. Generally, what are the > options here for moving forward? > As a suggestion, next time dont make 72 hours the max. vote time. 72 hours is the min. vote time, but you can keep it open end, which wo

Re: [PROPOSAL] Silk as new Incubator project

2014-09-27 Thread Branko Čibej
On 27.09.2014 05:38, Konstantin Boudnik wrote: > Hi David. > > I believe it will be needing a usual place to publish releases Release tarballs go here before the release vote starts: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ignite After the vote passes, they should be moved here:

Re: [PROPOSAL] Silk as new Incubator project

2014-09-27 Thread Konstantin Boudnik
I was thinking along the lines of having commits going to the dev@ list and when the traffic becomes heavier to open the commits@, but your approach might be better. I will update the proposal accordingly. Thanks! -- Take care, Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik 2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616 6115 220F 6980 1F2

[LAZY][IP CLEARANCE] FlatSpark for Apache Flex

2014-09-27 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, Apache Flex received a donation of FlatSpark code. The IP clearance form can be found here: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/flex-flatspark.html This is a lazy vote so if no -1 votes are cast within the next 72 hours, the vote passes. Thanks, Justin -

Re: [VOTE] Apache DeviceMap Data 1.0.1 incubating

2014-09-27 Thread Reza Naghibi
So this release only got 2 of the 3 needed votes. Generally, what are the options here for moving forward? Original message From: Bertrand Delacretaz Date:09/25/2014 10:03 AM (GMT-05:00) To: Incubator General Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache DeviceMap Data 1.0.1 incubating On

Re: IP clearance votes

2014-09-27 Thread John D. Ament
I believe the accepting vote is based on the organization receiving the donation - e.g. a podling, existing TLP. The actual IP clearance vote is by lazy consensus via the incubator for the incubator to check that all of the form is filled in properly. John On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Justi

IP clearance votes

2014-09-27 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, I've notice most IP clearance votes tend to be lazy, however at the bottom of the IP clearance form [1] it states: "Adoption by lazy concensus is acceptable but not recommended." Anyone explain why this is the case? Thanks, Justin 1. http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-te