Hi,
This is a bit late so just take it as advice for the next release I would of
voted +1 or +0. More likely +0 as I was unable to compile the release.
- signatures and hashes correct
- LICENSE and NOTICE OK (but see below)
- the install instructions need o be improved
- no unexpected binaries
-
+1 on what Justin said. And I am not affiliated w/ Pivotal in _any_ way.
Cos
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 08:10AM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> >> On 13 Apr 2015, at 06:39, Ted Dunning wrote:
> >>
> >> I think it is common to take a quick look at code coming in. In
>
> To be clear, there were convers
+1 [binding]
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:46AM, Jake Farrell wrote:
> This thread is to start a vote on the graduation resolution Apache Parquet
> has approved on the dev list with 14 positive votes (11 PPMC (4 from IPMC
> members), 3 community)
>
> Status page: http://incubator.apache.org/projects
This vote passes, with 3 IPMC +1 votes and no -1 or 0 votes (2 IPMC and
4 PPMC +1s from the project vote). Thanks to everyone that had a look
and voted!
rb
On 04/12/2015 09:04 AM, Ryan Blue wrote:
Hi everyone,
I propose the following RC to be released as official Apache Parquet
1.6.0 release
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Justin Erenkrantz
wrote:
> It's extremely hard to come to Apache when you have a vague idea and no
> code.
>
> The Incubator is simply too high a bar for folks who just want to play
> with an idea and aren't sure where it is heading.
>
> So, I wouldn't hold it aga
+1 binding - checksums and signature pass, NOTICE, DISCLAIMER and LICENSE
all look right, RAT passes. One minor quirk is that if you download
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/parquet/apache-parquet-mr-1.6.0-incubating-rc2/apache-parquet-mr-1.6.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
through Chrome,
+1 binding.
A.
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Ryan Blue wrote:
> Thanks for linking to the MR release thread, Jake!
>
> This is a good opportunity to remind people that the Parquet MR release
> vote is on-going and could use a little attention, too.
>
> Thanks!
>
> rb
>
>
>
> On 04/14/2015 0
On 4/14/15, 8:08 AM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>I really hope we aren't setting the precedent that we can't look at
>source code prior to bringing in a project to the incubator. Is there
>a reason the repo remains private on Github?
>In particular, you have what appears to be a relatively diverse s
+1
Build sources and ran tests. Looks good.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 binding
>
> I checked:
> - artefact contains "incubating"
> - signatures and hashes good
> - LICENSE and NOTICE correct
> - has DISCLAIMER
> - All source files have correct headers
> -
On 15 April 2015 at 15:10, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Ted Dunning
> wrote:
> > I hate to be a pissant, but why does it follow that new code has to be
> > implemented in private?
> >
> > Building community can start with the first semi-colon. It doesn't have
> to
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 5:31 PM Marvin Humphrey
wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Justin Mclean
> wrote:
> >> I'll prepare a new release with all test resources with unclear
> >> licensing removed and the tests that require them deactivated for now.
> >
> > That could be an easy short te
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> I hate to be a pissant, but why does it follow that new code has to be
> implemented in private?
>
> Building community can start with the first semi-colon. It doesn't have to
> wait until the code is frozen.
We were having this conversation
I hate to be a pissant, but why does it follow that new code has to be
implemented in private?
Building community can start with the first semi-colon. It doesn't have to
wait until the code is frozen.
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Seetharam Venkatesh <
venkat...@innerzeal.com> wrote:
> On
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 5:08 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> I really hope we aren't setting the precedent that we can't look at
> source code prior to bringing in a project to the incubator. Is there
> a reason the repo remains private on Github?
>
A lot of new code and ideas was being implemented and
14 matches
Mail list logo
