Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+0 (binding) As we discussed in a previous thread, I have concerns about the current status of the project, both regarding implementation and community, and if incubating it now is the best for the goals of the project. On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Atri Sharma wrote: > Hi all, > > Following

RE: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

I said *better* not *more* -Original Message- From: Alan D. Cabrera [mailto:l...@toolazydogs.com] Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2015 2:34 PM To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy > On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:36 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Personally I

Re: Require projects to have solid API docs

> On Oct 11, 2015, at 9:20 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: >> Should != Must > > Yes, I know. But I didn't want to have everyone leap into yet another > long-winded debate with no one even having mentioned that there is > existing policy on th

Re: Require projects to have solid API docs

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > Should != Must Yes, I know. But I didn't want to have everyone leap into yet another long-winded debate with no one even having mentioned that there is existing policy on this matter. Julian --

Re: [DISCUSS] [REVISED] Mentor neutrality policy

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > First off: Can we *please* focus on the revised proposal and not get > into a loop about the original email? I'll change the topic if that helps. > > The revised edition, as partly suggested by Sam (and echoed by Bertrand) > was: > > - Binding

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 non binding Tim > On Oct 11, 2015, at 4:59 PM, Luke Han wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > > Best Regards! > - > > Luke Han > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 4:33 AM, Alan D. Cabrera > wrote: > >> +1 - binding >> >> >> Regards, >> Alan >> >>> On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:55 AM,

Re: Incubating S2Graph

It looks very interesting for me. As our incubating experience, would like to recommend refer to the Proposal Guide [1] first to prepare such paper work and also find some mentors who could help you for further discussion, vote and other process. BTW, other project's proposals are very great refe

Incubating S2Graph

Hello Forks. I was referred to this list as a starting point for getting a project incubated with ASF. I am the developer of S2Graph, an open-source distributed graph database s2graph on HBase. Here is the github repository and presentations that describe how s2graph store data as property graph

Re: Require projects to have solid API docs

The Apache Kafka javadoc and scala doc are published with source and binaries https://archive.apache.org/dist/kafka/0.8.2.2/ and they can be generated from source. There is no javadoc for both producer and consumer (yet but you can generate from trunk for 0.9) because the new java consumer has bee

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 (non-binding) Best Regards! - Luke Han On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 4:33 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > +1 - binding > > > Regards, > Alan > > > On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:55 AM, Atri Sharma wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > Following the discussion about Concerted I would like to cal

Re: [DISCUSS] [REVISED] Mentor neutrality policy

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:39 PM Daniel Gruno wrote: > First off: Can we *please* focus on the revised proposal and not get > into a loop about the original email? I'll change the topic if that helps. > > The revised edition, as partly suggested by Sam (and echoed by Bertrand) > was: > > - Binding

Re: [DISCUSS] [REVISED] Mentor neutrality policy

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > First off: Can we *please* focus on the revised proposal and not get > into a loop about the original email? I'll change the topic if that helps. > > The revised edition, as partly suggested by Sam (and echoed by Bertrand) > was: > > - Binding

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

+100 on what Ross said. Couldn't said it better (read his blog). -- Nikita Ivanov On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > I blogged on this topic some time ago - basically it is my opinion that if > I am a good employee I would never try to contribute code to an Apache > project

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Daniel Gruno wrote on 10/9/15 3:18 PM: > On 10/09/2015 08:02 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz >> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or >>

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

> On Oct 9, 2015, at 12:18 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > I would imagine no one would object to a policy that says you cannot > have a binding vote if you have a financial interest in graduating a > podling, I would. People on the IPMC and ASF are supposed to be trustworthy out of the gate. If

Re: [DISCUSS] [REVISED] Mentor neutrality policy

First off: Can we *please* focus on the revised proposal and not get into a loop about the original email? I'll change the topic if that helps. The revised edition, as partly suggested by Sam (and echoed by Bertrand) was: - Binding votes on incubation, graduation and/or retirement are only valid

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

> On Oct 9, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Sam Ruby wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz > wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: >>> ...Furthermore, I would like to see this extended to votes on graduating or >>> retiring podlings,.. >> >> IMO

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

I’m -1 on on this. The whole premise of the ASF is that it is a meritocracy and that volunteers at various “levels” of the organization have attained their status because they are trustworthy. Without this premise, the ASF falls apart. Finally, it’s not clear to me that this addresses the prob

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

> On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:36 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Personally I would focus more on better oversight of podling and mentor > activity. The goal is to catch the occasional problem case rather than put > restrictions in place. I'm not sure how to do that though. I and others have > made many

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

I’m not sure this needs to be resolved before the polling can be accepted into the Incubator. Regards, Alan > On Oct 9, 2015, at 2:01 PM, Julian Hyde wrote: > > I have agreed to be a mentor to Concerted and I think it is an > interesting idea. I am inclined to vote for it entering the incuba

Re: [VOTE] Accept Concerted into the Apache Incubator

+1 - binding Regards, Alan > On Oct 9, 2015, at 8:55 AM, Atri Sharma wrote: > > Hi all, > > Following the discussion about Concerted I would like to call a vote for > accepting Concerted as a new incubator project. > > The proposal text is included below, and available on the wiki: > > http

RE: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

I blogged on this topic some time ago - basically it is my opinion that if I am a good employee I would never try to contribute code to an Apache project that is not beneficial to the broader community. Such an action would be detrimental to her employers business. Consequently, there is no conf

Re: Require projects to have solid API docs

Should != Must Regards, Alan > On Oct 11, 2015, at 11:49 AM, Julian Hyde wrote: > > Per [1], "Apache projects should provide sufficient documentation [… so that > … ] users can both make use of our software freely”. > > And: "users of Apache software should be able to find our software, lear

Re: Require projects to have solid API docs

On 11/10/2015 16:59, Andrew Pennebaker wrote: > In the future, could Apache Incubator require projects to maintain better > API documentation before graduation? In particular, Kafka has rather sparse > documentation in v0.8. The Javadocs appear to be randomly hosted on this or > that professor webp

Re: Require projects to have solid API docs

Per [1], "Apache projects should provide sufficient documentation [… so that … ] users can both make use of our software freely”. And: "users of Apache software should be able to find our software, learn how to use it, and actually apply it to all its common use cases solely by going to the Apa

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Is there something else going on that I am not aware of? Is someone using undue influence where they shouldn’t be? On the Legal list dealing with hypothetical situations is continually avoided. While a code of conduct for mentors might make sense, penalizing mentors who are trying to educate

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > > Hi Incubator folks, > > > > I would like to propose we adopt a mentor neutrality policy for > > incubating podlings: > > > > - A mentor must not be financially tied to the project

Re: Require projects to have solid API docs

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > No. That’s not the role of the foundation. However, ensuring people > contributing to the docs are recognized like any other contributor is the > role of the foundation. Can you help contribute to such docs? > > > +1 -- Luciano Resende http

RE: Require projects to have solid API docs

No. That’s not the role of the foundation. However, ensuring people contributing to the docs are recognized like any other contributor is the role of the foundation. Can you help contribute to such docs? Sent from Outlook Mail for Windows 10 phon

Require projects to have solid API docs

In the future, could Apache Incubator require projects to maintain better API documentation before graduation? In particular, Kafka has rather sparse documentation in v0.8. The Javadocs appear to be randomly hosted on this or that professor webpage, and no Kafka javadoc has documentation for *both*

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

I'm -1 on this. We have people working for companies who have a vested interest probably on most PMC's at Apache and why should we have a different set of rules for the Incubator PMC than any other PMC? If there is a specific concerns that an individual is acting against the ASF's best interest, t

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:47 AM Daniel Gruno wrote: > On 10/11/2015 03:44 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:36 AM Daniel Gruno > wrote: > > > >> On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > >>> > Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits : > > Producing go

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On 10/11/2015 03:44 PM, John D. Ament wrote: > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:36 AM Daniel Gruno wrote: > >> On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: >>> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits : Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just >> the m

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 9:36 AM Daniel Gruno wrote: > On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > > > >> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits : > >> > >> Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just > the > >> mentors fix that themselves, there is something wron

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Kylin from the Apache Incubator

Thank you very much for your great feedback. For the bylaws, personally I would like to have one to ensure the community will grow health and active. There's one draft will coming to PPMC first for discussion which I'm working on. As my research, there are some projects have this section, like Hi

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

On 10/11/2015 03:34 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > >> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits : >> >> Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just the >> mentors fix that themselves, there is something wrong with the community of >> the podling. > > I never questioned tha

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

> Am 11.10.2015 um 14:45 schrieb Pierre Smits : > > Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just the > mentors fix that themselves, there is something wrong with the community of > the podling. I never questioned that. But the proposal sounds that a mentor _must not_ c

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

Producing good code is a community effort. When it comes down to just the mentors fix that themselves, there is something wrong with the community of the podling. This discussion is not about what participants do with their mentor hat on in the podling. I expect we all appreciate what mentors do w

Re: [DISCUSS] Mentor neutrality policy

-1 Mentors who have no interest (financially or purely technical doesn’t matter in the end) will not find enough time to _really_ look into the projects health. Be honest with yourself: how much do you look into the code if you are not working on it yourself? How could you then detect that code