Hi Marvin,
As far as I remember, Kalumet is almost exclusively the work of JB
Onofre who is an ASF member, therefore I don't see a problem.
That said I think it's best to wait a bit and let JB speak up. I cc'ed
him, just to make sure he notices this thread.
Cheers,
Hadrian
On 11/18/2015 05
On Wed, 2015-11-18 at 08:48 +0900, Brian Spector wrote:
> Hi Alex, thank you for the suggestion, but from our point of view, as I
> outlined below, we would disadvantage the project as a whole by not having
> the MIRACL name in it.
>
> At the same time, I completely understand the concern that a c
Hi,
Sorry -1 Due to license and copyright issues and possible crypto issue.
I checked:
- artefact contains incubating
- signature and hashes good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE is missing a couple of things/has a few issues
- NOTICE is good but may be missing thing form other Apache bundled softwa
Hi,
>> Could not find zookeeper-tests.jar (org.apache.zookeeper:zookeeper:3.4.6).
>
> Searched in the following locations:
>
> file:/Users/johnament/.m2/repository/org/apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.6/zookeeper-3.4.6-tests.jar
I run into the same error, assumed it was my setup and rm -rf
~/.m
Thank you very much Stack! It definitely looks better than just wiki.
It would be helpful to improve the proposal.
Best regards,
Hyunsik
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Stack wrote:
> Glad to see s2graph being put up as an incubator project.
>
> Here [1] are some suggested edits to try and hel
Could you include some build instructions? Got this error trying ./gradlew
build
Could not resolve all dependencies for configuration
':myriad-scheduler:compile'.
> Could not find zookeeper-tests.jar (org.apache.zookeeper:zookeeper:3.4.6).
Searched in the following locations:
file:/Users/joh
Hi,
Sorry but it -1 due to inclusion of a jar in the source release. This issue has
come up before on the incubator mailing list e.g. [4].
Other than some minor license issues everything else is good.
I checked:
- artefact name contains incubating
- signatures and hashes good
- DISCLAIMER exist
On 17 November 2015 at 16:20, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Summary of my objection: community building is an art not a science, there is
> no "score" that can be placed upon a community.
True.
Louis.
PS Alas, "scores" are chalked against the manager of communities who
fails to satisfy the beany needs
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> The copyright checkbox for Kalumet is marked with a question mark, which I
> interpret as "not checked off":
>
> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/kalumet#Copyright
>
> A successful incubating release would have settled the issue, b
On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> I will attend to the retirement procedures.
The retirement procedures for Droids have been completed.
Marvin Humphrey
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incub
Sorry all. It's user error. I was expecting most recent first :)
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:54 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Gregory Chase wrote:
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201511.mbox/browser
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Gregory Chase wrote:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201511.mbox/browser
> ...
That looks up to date for me.
That page uses javascript to load the content, maybe it's failing on
your browser?
-Bertrand
I see 253 messages from incubator-geode for November, with the last dated today.
I followed the below-supplied URL, switched to date view, and then went to the
last available page (3 in this case).
Is this not reproducible?
- Dennis
> -Original Message-
> From: Gregory Chase [mailto:g
Hello,
The Apache Trafodion community has voted on and approved its first release
– Apache Trafodion 1.3.0 –incubating.
Vote request on dev list:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-trafodion-dev/201511.mbox/%3Cedf95f7384696f8ec87bd1b8ad102b52%40mail.gmail.com%3E
Vote resul
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-geode-dev/201511.mbox/browser
As one example.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <
bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Gregory Chase wrote:
> > ...I notice that a number of
> > the incuba
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Gregory Chase wrote:
> ...I notice that a number of
> the incubating projects mail archives have not updated since Nov 2
There are several archives, which archive URLs are you referring to?
-Bertrand
-
Greetings,
Maybe this belongs in the Infra mail list, but I notice that a number of
the incubating projects mail archives have not updated since Nov 2.
I presume this is a known problem?
--
Greg Chase
Director of Big Data Communities
http://www.pivotal.io/big-data
Pivotal Software
http://www.p
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe the issue here is that with CTR it is very easy to miss the 72h
> lazy consensus voting (with an assumed +1 absence any votes cast) that most
> CTR projects operate under... and thus it can also
Le 18/11/15 17:54, Ross Gardler a écrit :
> Summarizing:
>
> In a healthy project I believe that the only significant things that change
> between CTR and RTC are:
>
> 1) speed of commit (CTR is faster)
> 2) quality of master, not releases (RTC catches most issues before commit,
> CTR shortly aft
typo s/every/revert/
If you do CTR and there are lots of vetos... which can happen if the
reviews are requesting rework or changes... then there would need to be a
lot of revert commits to revert the commits that were vetoed.
Thankfully in CTR mostly the case is you just commit the rework rather
On 11/17/2015 08:13 PM, Marko Rodriguez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I suppose the distilled intention of the proposal is to identify the
> answer(s) to the following question:
>
> What makes a "good" open source project?
>
> As I read on general@ and from our project's mentors, "good" is grounded
On 11/18/2015 09:20 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
On 18 November 2015 at 14:24, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
Le 18/11/15 14:34, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
On Wednesday 18 November 2015, Emmanuel Lécharny
wrote:
Le 18/11/15 11:31, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
I believe the issue here is that with
I agree, mostly, with your mail Stephen, but I wonder about the reference you
make to "the mess of every commits". Do you really see that?
If you do see it I suspect the project has a problem. In my experience reverts
are rare. We prefer people improve what is there rather than revert what they
Summarizing:
In a healthy project I believe that the only significant things that change
between CTR and RTC are:
1) speed of commit (CTR is faster)
2) quality of master, not releases (RTC catches most issues before commit, CTR
shortly after commit)
I agree with others, nothing in the Apache W
On 18 November 2015 at 14:24, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
> Le 18/11/15 14:34, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
> > On Wednesday 18 November 2015, Emmanuel Lécharny
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Le 18/11/15 11:31, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
> >>> I believe the issue here is that with CTR it is very easy to miss th
Le 18/11/15 14:34, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
> On Wednesday 18 November 2015, Emmanuel Lécharny
> wrote:
>
>> Le 18/11/15 11:31, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
>>> I believe the issue here is that with CTR it is very easy to miss the 72h
>>> lazy consensus voting (with an assumed +1 absence any votes
> On 18 Nov 2015, at 13:34, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 18 November 2015, Emmanuel Lécharny
> wrote:
>
>> Le 18/11/15 11:31, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
>>> I believe the issue here is that with CTR it is very easy to miss the 72h
>>> lazy consensus voting (with an assumed +1 ab
merit is merit, why would the barrier for new committers be different here
than in any other project? If the ramp up and time to learn the projects
source is the barrier then it is on us to help make it easier through
documentation, clear project roadmap and entry level consumable tickets to
help t
On Wednesday 18 November 2015, Emmanuel Lécharny
wrote:
> Le 18/11/15 11:31, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
> > I believe the issue here is that with CTR it is very easy to miss the 72h
> > lazy consensus voting (with an assumed +1 absence any votes cast) that
> most
> > CTR projects operate under...
Le 18/11/15 11:31, Stephen Connolly a écrit :
> I believe the issue here is that with CTR it is very easy to miss the 72h
> lazy consensus voting (with an assumed +1 absence any votes cast) that most
> CTR projects operate under... and thus it can also be very easy to miss the
> fact that there are
Hi Henry,
good news to see this proposal !
Regards
JB
On 11/17/2015 07:49 PM, Henry Robinson wrote:
Hi all -
We'd like to start a discussion regarding a proposal to submit Impala to
the Apache Incubator.
The proposal text is available on the Wiki here:
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/Impal
I believe the issue here is that with CTR it is very easy to miss the 72h
lazy consensus voting (with an assumed +1 absence any votes cast) that most
CTR projects operate under... and thus it can also be very easy to miss the
fact that there are reviews going on (and I am being generous here, I
sus
+1 (binding)
D
> On Nov 16, 2015, at 11:01 AM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> The Corinthia community has voted to retire:
>
> http://s.apache.org/odN
>
> This is a vote of the IPMC to confirm the decision to retire the podling.
>
> [ ] +1 to retire Corinthia from the Incubator
Interesting, Todd, can you identify which of your three arguments for CTR are
not present in RTC.
Ross
-Original Message-
From: Todd Lipcon [mailto:t...@cloudera.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 11:23 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: RTC vs CTR (was: Concerning Sent
34 matches
Mail list logo
