Re: Licensing Issue

Stefan, In order to "open source" something, you have to define what you mean by "open source". If you mean that anybody can do anything at all with the code including claim it as their own, then you mean to put it into the public domain . If you mean

Re: [PROPOSAL]Pistachio

Hello Gavin, I would like to volunteer as mentor. I'm first time mentor, hope you will bare with me. >> Kytoto cabinet is under GNU GPL, but it is not a hard necessary dependency to Pistachio, it’s an optional pluggable storage engine. It’s designed in the way that it’s totally pluggable and very

Re: [VOTE] Accept Freemarker into Apache Incubator

Congratulations Jacopo, Best regards, Pierre Op vrijdag 26 juni 2015 heeft Jacopo Cappellato het volgende geschreven: > With 20 positive votes (13 binding and 7 non-binding) and no negative > vote, the vote to accept Freemarker into the Incubator is successful. > We will proceed with the proje

[RESULT][VOTE] Accept Freemarker into Apache Incubator

With 20 positive votes (13 binding and 7 non-binding) and no negative vote, the vote to accept Freemarker into the Incubator is successful. We will proceed with the project initial setup. Thank you, Jacopo +1 Pierre Smits Sergio Fernández (*) Jean-Baptiste Onofré (*) Bertrand Delacretaz (*) At

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz < bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > > ...My understanding is that the Docker Hub page is under the control of > the > > Geode PMC > > There's no Geode PMC, as it's a podling the Incubato

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Atlas version 0.5-incubating

Sorry Chris, one of the repo, codehaus is shutdown - we have already addressed this and will spin a new patch release post this. Thanks! On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:42 PM Chris Douglas wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Checksum, signature OK, DISCLAIMER/LICENSE/NOTICE look OK, compile > from source works

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Atlas version 0.5-incubating

+1 (binding) Checksum, signature OK, DISCLAIMER/LICENSE/NOTICE look OK, compile from source works but the package target broke for me. -C On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 6:46 PM, Venkatesh Seetharam wrote: > Hello folks, > > This is a call for a vote on the Apache Atlas 0.5 incubating release. > > A vot

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Atlas version 0.5-incubating

HI, +1 binding I checked: - incubating in name - Signatures and check sums good - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE and NOTICE correct - No unexpected binaries in source - All source has apache headers - Can compile from source Thanks, Justin

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote: > Am 25.06.2015 15:13, schrieb Sean Busbey: > [...] >> >> If the Docker Hub page wasn't under the control of the Geode PMC, then I'd >> say it was a marks violation and they'd have to seek out control of it or >> removal. > > > can you expla

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Atlas version 0.5-incubating

+1 On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 12:28 PM, Arpit Gupta wrote: > +1 (non binding) > > We have been running regressions tests on this release and dont see any > blockers. > > -- > Arpit Gupta > Hortonworks Inc. > http://hortonworks.com/ > > > On Jun 25, 2015, at 12:25 PM, Jakob Homan wrote: > > > > +1

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Atlas version 0.5-incubating

+1 (binding, forwarded from podling vote) On 25 June 2015 at 10:05, Jon Maron wrote: > +1 > >> On Jun 24, 2015, at 9:46 PM, Venkatesh Seetharam >> wrote: >> >> Hello folks, >> >> This is a call for a vote on the Apache Atlas 0.5 incubating release. >> >> A vote was held on developer mailing lis

Re: Licensing Issue

Please - can we all stop using "licenses" and just open source everything? Progress is waiting for us. BTW, I am now adding all (!) programming languages to the realm of AI. (Meaning they can then be programmed automatically.) tinybrain.blog.de Cheers Stefan Am 21.06.2015 00:51 schrieb "Lewis Joh

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Atlas version 0.5-incubating

+1 > On Jun 24, 2015, at 9:46 PM, Venkatesh Seetharam wrote: > > Hello folks, > > This is a call for a vote on the Apache Atlas 0.5 incubating release. > > A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed with 9 +1's. > > Vote thread: http://s.apache.org/RyM > Results thread: http://s.

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

Am 25.06.2015 15:13, schrieb Sean Busbey: [...] If the Docker Hub page wasn't under the control of the Geode PMC, then I'd say it was a marks violation and they'd have to seek out control of it or removal. can you explain me how that is a marks violation? bye blackdrag -- Jochen "blackdrag" T

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Atlas version 0.5-incubating

+1 (binding) Arun > On Jun 24, 2015, at 6:46 PM, Venkatesh Seetharam wrote: > > Hello folks, > > This is a call for a vote on the Apache Atlas 0.5 incubating release. > > A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed with 9 +1's. > > Vote thread: http://s.apache.org/RyM > Results t

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > ...My understanding is that the Docker Hub page is under the control of the > Geode PMC There's no Geode PMC, as it's a podling the Incubator PMC is in charge of their releases. Even if you ignore the fact that projects are not supposed t

Re: [PROPOSAL]Pistachio

We need more mentors. Please let me know if you are interested. THanks, Gavin Li On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Gavin Li wrote: > Roman, > > I think Pistachio is similar to Ignite in the sense that they both try to > distribute the computation to storage to co-locate the data and > computatio

Re: Licensing Issue

Ralph, yes, you might have a good point there. But that should then raise another angle. Say that I have 2 plugins for a project, both with the same set of features, and one is "recommended" and has ALv2, whereas the "optional" one is LGPL. However, a majority (say everyone) chooses the LGPL plugi

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

On Jun 25, 2015 3:01 AM, "Emmanuel Lécharny" wrote: > > Le 25/06/15 09:21, Jochen Theodorou a écrit : > > Am 24.06.2015 22:32, schrieb Emmanuel Lécharny: > >> Le 24/06/15 22:28, David Nalley a écrit : > > [...] > >>> More generally to the underlying issue that prompted this discussion: > >>> With

Re: [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.2.0 release (RC2)

On 24.06.2015 08:34, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote: > On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Justin Mclean > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >>> Moreover, modules under extdata are test only and are not used anywhere >> in >>> the project. They are used to test code deployment functionality. >> Perhaps it would be best to

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

On 24/06/2015 18:02, "Markus Weimer" wrote: >> Personally I think the policy should be clarified such that nightly >>builds >> MUST only live on ASF infrastructure (whether that be the Nexus >>SNAPSHOTs >> repo, committer web space etc). As soon as you start putting them on >> external services

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Atlas version 0.5-incubating

+1 (binding) Verified the following : - Checksums match. - Signature looks good. - Artifacts contain incubating word. - DISCLAIMER exists. - Top level LICENSE and NOTICE files look good. - Built from source successfully. Thanks Amareshwari On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 7:16

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

Le 25/06/15 09:21, Jochen Theodorou a écrit : > Am 24.06.2015 22:32, schrieb Emmanuel Lécharny: >> Le 24/06/15 22:28, David Nalley a écrit : > [...] >>> More generally to the underlying issue that prompted this discussion: >>> With the concrete example of Geode's DockerHub presence, I don't think >

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

Am 24.06.2015 22:32, schrieb Emmanuel Lécharny: Le 24/06/15 22:28, David Nalley a écrit : [...] More generally to the underlying issue that prompted this discussion: With the concrete example of Geode's DockerHub presence, I don't think it's acceptable: https://registry.hub.docker.com/u/apacheg

Re: [DISCUSS] Communicating intent around non-release, downstream integration binary artifacts

Am 24.06.2015 23:32, schrieb Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH): For HTTPd I was referring to the assertion from Justin earlier in this thread " FWIW, httpd always had nightly tarballs available for consumption and testing." (though reading that now I wonder if he meant source tarballs - which is an e