Thanks a bunch for the detailed explanation of how git object model works,
Jochen!
Looks like now we can put "git branch deletion data loss" fiction to rest.
Cos
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 07:11AM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> Am 23.07.2015 05:13, schrieb Ted Dunning:
> >On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:54 P
Am 23.07.2015 05:13, schrieb Ted Dunning:
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
Concerns have been raised about the people behind the actual commits,
that
seems to be left open ?
The identity of the committers is never lost (at least t
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Valentin Kulichenko <
> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Concerns have been raised about the people behind the actual commits,
> > that
> > > seems to be left open ?
> > >
> >
> > The identity of t
Hi,
Vote to release Apache Zeppelin 0.5.0-incubating passed with the following
results:
4 binding "+1" votes, no "0" or "-1" votes.
IPMC binding votes were provided by:
Konstantin Boudnik
Justin Mclean
Edward J. Yoon
Jan Iversen
Here's vote thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incuba
Thanks all IPMC for kind assistance.
I'll send vote result email and proceed next steps.
Thanks,
moon
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 8:52 AM jan i wrote:
> On 23 July 2015 at 01:49, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
>
> > Given that issues were addressed (or are work in progress) and the 72
> hours
> > windo
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry for some late responses. It so happens that most of the community
> members are on european time zones.
>
Thanks so much for jumping in!
> > I recognize that the activity on the ML is diverse FI
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Valentin Kulichenko <
valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Concerns have been raised about the people behind the actual commits,
> that
> > seems to be left open ?
> >
>
> The identity of the committers is never lost (at least to my knowledge). We
> actually h
Hi,
I will jump in as I'm also on Ignite PMC.
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:50 PM, jan i wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am concerned, seen from my POW (and please excuse it is of course my
> personal pow), too many
> questions remain unanswered.
>
> I am concerned because I would have expected the community to
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
>
>
> On 2015-07-23 00:31, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
>
>> Thanks Julian - that's something that this community would have it
>> improve.
>> Although I don't see if a particular way of using (or not using) JIRA is a
>> graduation's requirement.
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:50AM, jan i wrote:
> Hi
>
> I am concerned, seen from my POW (and please excuse it is of course my
> personal pow), too many
> questions remain unanswered.
>
> I am concerned because I would have expected the community to have clear
> answers (independent of whether I a
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 04:46PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> Actually, that document just makes me more dubious.
>
> The problems I see are:
>
> 1) the identity of the original person doing the work is obscured by the
> squash commits
No. Besides, I am not talking about rebases and force-pushes. I am t
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote:
> On 07/22/2015 09:23 PM, Julian Hyde wrote:
> > I reviewed Ignite’s commit log and email lists. I got the impression of
> a split personality: The dev list[1] is very open and clearly following the
> Apache Way. Meanwhile, the commit log[2] is
+1 (binding)
rgds
jan i.
ps. when you write to IPMC directly please include general@ we are lazy and
do reply-all.
On 23 July 2015 at 01:57, Henry Saputra wrote:
> Thanks! I definitely owe you glass of wine when we met in person ;)
>
> But, unfortunately we need the +1 in the general@ list w
On 23 July 2015 at 01:49, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> Given that issues were addressed (or are work in progress) and the 72 hours
> window has passed (eg anyone who wanted to chime in had a chance to do it)
> I'd
> call the vote and send the official result email to this list. Then follow
> with
Hi
I am concerned, seen from my POW (and please excuse it is of course my
personal pow), too many
questions remain unanswered.
I am concerned because I would have expected the community to have clear
answers (independent of whether I agree or not) to
e.g. the concerns from Daniel.
It seems to me
Actually, that document just makes me more dubious.
The problems I see are:
1) the identity of the original person doing the work is obscured by the
squash commits
2) the deletion of the bug branch after integration involves deletion of
important information from git (and I thought that rewritin
Given that issues were addressed (or are work in progress) and the 72 hours
window has passed (eg anyone who wanted to chime in had a chance to do it) I'd
call the vote and send the official result email to this list. Then follow
with the rest of required steps like moving artifacts, etc.
Thanks
Thanks everyone for valuable concern and comment to the first release of
Apache Zeppelin (incubating).
Like Alexander mentioned, community will quickly address issues raised
here, over the next release.
I'd like to learn more how the vote goes. While this vote has four +1, is
it okay to close this
After a quick walk through the master log I see that a bunch of the
questionable commits are resulted from the dev. branches histories not being
properly squashed before the feature is merged into the master.
This is something that mentors have asked to address before and, in fact, the
community i
On 2015-07-23 00:31, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
Thanks Julian - that's something that this community would have it improve.
Although I don't see if a particular way of using (or not using) JIRA is a
graduation's requirement. If there's a way to trace a particular feature to an
archived discussio
Hi Justin, Hadrian,
Yes, that's the justification for omitting the copyright header in those
files. From the incubator-general discussion for release
0.7.0-M2-incubating [1]:
This one has been previously discussed on our lists; our conclusion
with our mentors was that the archetype is a
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Konstantin Boudnik wrote:
> Shall we agree that the community is ready to graduate and task the new PMC
> with a couple of the action items such as keep recruiting outside
> committers,
> thus growing the viability of the project, and improving the JIRA
> communic
Thanks Julian - that's something that this community would have it improve.
Although I don't see if a particular way of using (or not using) JIRA is a
graduation's requirement. If there's a way to trace a particular feature to an
archived discussion - ie mailing list - there's no problem in my prof
Thank you guys for resolving the raised issues so quickly!
Cos
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 02:25PM, Alexander Bezzubov wrote:
> Got it, thank you very much, Justin, for the explanation!
>
> On behalf of the Apache Zeppelin (incubating) PPMC I have contacted
> the original author and he agreed to con
Hi,
> That is the text file used to test local file. Does it need to be
> added with Apache header?
Given the content is trivial there's probably no need, but it does stick out as
it’s the only file to be missing a header.
Thanks,
Justin
-
On 07/22/2015 09:23 PM, Julian Hyde wrote:
> I reviewed Ignite’s commit log and email lists. I got the impression of a
> split personality: The dev list[1] is very open and clearly following the
> Apache Way. Meanwhile, the commit log[2] is (to my eyes at least) difficult
> to decipher.
>
> In
Justin,
That is the text file used to test local file. Does it need to be
added with Apache header?
- Henry
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 2:14 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 binding
>
> I checked:
> - release has incubating in name
> - signatures and hashes good
> - DISCLAIMER exists
> - LICEN
Re: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1015
This also happens in other projects I visited. Issues start out small, and
over time they grow towards completeness (description, better subject, etc)
based on the feedback provided via comments and via on and off list
interactions. One issue s
@Branko: are referring to TEZ in your last posting, or Ignite?
If you are talking about ignite, have a look at:
http://markmail.org/search/incubator.ignite+list:org.apache.ignite.dev and
http://markmail.org/search/incubator.ignite+list:org.apache.ignite.user and
check out the 'Who sent it' overvie
Hmm...
Also, if you look at the JIRA in question, the question of what is
happening is also not resovled:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-1015
There are no comments, nor any linkage to the commit history.
This could definitely be improved. It is important to take the course
that J
I reviewed Ignite’s commit log and email lists. I got the impression of a split
personality: The dev list[1] is very open and clearly following the Apache Way.
Meanwhile, the commit log[2] is (to my eyes at least) difficult to decipher.
In the commit log, messages such as "Merge remote-tracking
Hi Cedric,
It's dug down somewhere in my memories, I bet somebody like Marvin or
Roman or Ted could quickly pull out their magic hats the authoritative
link. There ore other projects that release in non-asf packages (e.g.
geronimo specs in javax.*) for very good reasons. I don't know what and
No such requirement actually exists
Jena graduated in April 2012 and because of our backwards compatibility
requirements the package names for existing code have until very recently
remained the same (though new code developed at Apache has used
org.apache.jena where possible)
Now we are finally
Hi Justin,
Being part of the maven archetype, these are the templates to
"quickstart" a user with a project using brooklyn. Such projects would
not be licensed to the ASF, but we could also say that it's then their
business to update the copyright header. I am kinda neutral on this one,
but I
+1 (binding)
Regards
JB
On 07/22/2015 08:49 AM, Richard Downer wrote:
This is to call for a vote for the release of Apache Brooklyn
0.7.0-incubating.
The Apache Brooklyn community have voted in favour of making this release:
Vote thread:
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-broo
Done.
-Taylor
> On Jul 22, 2015, at 4:25 AM, Luke Han wrote:
>
> Hi Taylor,
> We are really glad you could be our mentor, really appreciated and
> looking forward to work with you.
>
> Could you please help to edit files like Marvin mentioned above?
>
> Thank you very much.
>
>
> * renaming of packages from brooklyn.* to org.apache.brooklyn.* will be
> required for graduation, I strongly encourage that step to be taken care of
> in the next release.
Where is such a requirement described? As far as I understand, package
names are best suited if they start with org.apache.
Hi,
+1 binding
I checked the source release.
- release contains incubating
- signatures and hashed good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE and NOTICE good (a few minor issues)
- no unexpected binary files
- some source files are missing headers (see
/usage/archetypes/quickstart/src/brooklyn-sample/sr
+1
I already voted in the PPMC vote, I am pasting below my findings.
Cheers,
Hadrian
--
Excellent work on the release Richard.
* tested the binaries on Linux, they work fine, although not my focus;
the ASF releases code as source, so I focused more on the source distro
* downloading,
Hi,
+1 binding
I checked:
- release has incubating in name
- signatures and hashes good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE and NOTICE all good
- no binary files in release (makes checking easy)
- all source files have headers
- can compile from source
Not an issue but any reason for this file?
/twill
On Wednesday, July 22, 2015, Luke Han wrote:
> Hi there,
> We have submitted proposal for Apache Kylin, but not see the update
> there on the wiki.
> Is that ok or should we do something else?
See the other replies. Wiki was solely used in the preparation.
The schedule for apachecon COR
On Wednesday, July 22, 2015, Richard Downer wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 at 09:32 jan i > wrote:
>
> > > Sorry I'm a bit late! I've modified the wiki page to add Brooklyn to
> the
> > > list of full talks, and volunteer myself for a shark tank talk.
> > >
> > ??? Confused, the schedul
Hi there,
We have submitted proposal for Apache Kylin, but not see the update
there on the wiki.
Is that ok or should we do something else?
Thanks.
Best Regards!
-
Luke Han
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 4:32 PM, jan i wrote:
> On 22 July 2015 at 10:17, Richard Dow
Hi Jan,
On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 at 09:32 jan i wrote:
> > Sorry I'm a bit late! I've modified the wiki page to add Brooklyn to the
> > list of full talks, and volunteer myself for a shark tank talk.
> >
> ??? Confused, the schedule is fixed and talks have been grouped, changes in
> the wiki page mad
+1 (binding)
jan i.
On 22 July 2015 at 10:31, Edward J. Yoon wrote:
> > On behalf of the Apache Zeppelin (incubating) PPMC I have contacted
> > the original author and he agreed to contribute this code, with the
> > proper Apache 2.0 licence header, directly to the Apache Zeppelin
> > (incubatin
On 22 July 2015 at 10:17, Richard Downer wrote:
> Hi Roman,
>
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2015 at 21:04 Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>
> > Both regular talks and "speed dating" proposals are currently tracked
> > over here: https://wiki.apache.org/apachecon/ACEU15Incubator
> > However, as of today we've got les
> On behalf of the Apache Zeppelin (incubating) PPMC I have contacted
> the original author and he agreed to contribute this code, with the
> proper Apache 2.0 licence header, directly to the Apache Zeppelin
> (incubating) codebase as a separate patch.
> So it is going to be resolved completely, to
Hi Taylor,
We are really glad you could be our mentor, really appreciated and
looking forward to work with you.
Could you please help to edit files like Marvin mentioned above?
Thank you very much.
Best Regards!
-
Luke Han
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:43 PM, P
Hi Roman,
On Sat, 27 Jun 2015 at 21:04 Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Both regular talks and "speed dating" proposals are currently tracked
> over here: https://wiki.apache.org/apachecon/ACEU15Incubator
> However, as of today we've got less that 20% participation rate from
> poddlings.
>
Sorry I'm a
On 21.07.2015 21:04, Ted Dunning wrote:
> Actually, given that this project was a spin-out of an internal project,
> this is a stunningly low number to have achieved so quickly (assuming that
> the 37% are actually active, that is).
Indeed. And yes, they're active; that's easily established by rea
50 matches
Mail list logo
