Hi Hari,
I'm on the Apache Falcon PMC and Falcon being a data pipeline management
solution for Hadoop, there might be enough interest to explore if we can
collaborate either being part of Falcon or a separate project.
Can you please elaborate on the scope and if orchestration is part of this?
Fal
Good catch, I missed the DISCLAIMER in my review.
LICENSE should be improved too even if I don't think it's a blocker for
this release.
Regards
JB
On 07/15/2016 01:50 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
Sorry but -1 due to missing DISCLAIMER in the release. See [1] for more
details
[1]:
http://incub
Hi Justin
Thanks for the detailed review! - especially in regards to the LICENSE file. We
had originally included license references that were part of a binary release.
I'll clean this up to remove these items and address the other issues you've
noted. Your youtube video is really helpful with w
Thanks John.
We have already merged a PR that has a separate DISCLAIMER file.I agree - it's
an easy thing to add at this time but we'll wait for the final tally.
On Friday, July 15, 2016 3:43 PM, John D. Ament
wrote:
Hi Kam,
Two things..
1. I'm not asking for the disclaimer in the RE
Hi,
-1 binding, missing DISCLAIMER and LICENSE and header issues
I checked:
- artefact names contain incubating
- hashes and signature good
- DISCLAIMER file is missing
- LICENSE contains things that are not bundled and missing things that are (see
below). It also contains paths to files that do
Hi,
+1 (binding)
I checked:
- artefact name contains incubating
- hashes and signature good
- DISCLAIMER exits
- LICENSE and NOTICE good
- Most source file have apache headers
- No unexpected binaries in source release
- Can compile from source
Minor issue you (IMO) should fix in the next releas
Hi Kam,
Two things..
1. I'm not asking for the disclaimer in the README. You can choose to put
it wherever you see appropriate, a dedicated DISCLAIMER file may make
sense. It shouldn't be too hard to re-roll a release with that fix (I
didn't see any other issues, but I can take a second closer
+1
Compiled, looked around licensing, etc
Nothing much to add other then the ones already mentioned above.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:05 PM, Velmurugan Periasamy
wrote:
> Incubator PMC:
>
> Apache Ranger community has voted on and approved a proposal to release
> Apache Ranger 0.6.0 (incubating
Forwarding my +1 from the dev list.
Alan.
> On Jul 14, 2016, at 22:05, Velmurugan Periasamy wrote:
>
> Incubator PMC:
>
> Apache Ranger community has voted on and approved a proposal to release
> Apache Ranger 0.6.0 (incubating).
>
> [VOTE RESULT] thread:
>
> https://lists.apache.org/th
Thanks John. We will add this to the README as suggested.
We will also update the web site (gearpump.apache.org) with the incubating
logo, disclaimer - however we were going to do that once we release (as part of
updating the website with the release information). Hopefully this is
acceptable. (
Thank you very much John. We will fix.
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 4:50 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> Sorry but -1 due to missing DISCLAIMER in the release. See [1] for more
> details
>
>
> [1]:
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#notes-disclaimer
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3
+1 (binding)
I checked licenses, notices, built on Ubuntu 14.04 JDK 1.8, checked signatures.
I also had fun learning about the WTFPL. I am shocked (SHOCKED!) that
you can use words like that on a software distro.
I concur with all of the issues Josh raised, especially the RAT
exclusions. Keep th
Hi,
+1 (binding) with reservations.
* xsums/sigs match
* KEYS contains necessary sig
* DISCLAIMER present
* Verified (lack of) NOTICE files for bundled ASLv2 code for all but one
case. See next section for the issue.
* Was able to build and run tests
* Ran rat-check
Now, all of the below shou
On Fri, 2016-07-15 at 13:49 +, Srihari Srinivasan wrote:
> Hence, I am reaching out to you folks for advise on what could be the best
> way forward for this effort. We are also open to explore collaborations with
> other existing projects that are already part of Apache. Please share your
>
Taking a look myself. Because Git tag names are not immutable (you could
overwrite the tag at any time), please use the commit's SHA1 instead of
the tag name alone in the future.
For reference, at the time which I'm checking, ranger-0.6.0-rc1 points
to 7e3252f305f6e50a2622f302461b44ff5fc4d62f.
Hi Folks,
I am Hari, a developer with a company called ThoughtWorks. We've been
developing data pipelines using on Hadoop,Spark etc for a while now. From our
experiences with different customers we've noticed a recurring need to carry
out tasks such as data preparation, data anonymization etc on
+1 (binding)
Review focused on the source release mechanics specifically around
build/licensing.
Signature checks out w/SHA512
Hashes all check out
Verified last meaningful commit in specific tag found in source.
Full clean build as per instructions found in readme worked perfectly.
Commentary:
Sorry but -1 due to missing DISCLAIMER in the release. See [1] for more
details
[1]:
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#notes-disclaimer
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 3:39 PM Kam Kasravi wrote:
> Hi IPMC Community
>
> The PPMC vote to release Apache Gearpump (incubating) 0.8.
+1 (binding)
Regards
JB
On 07/14/2016 09:39 PM, Kam Kasravi wrote:
Hi IPMC Community
The PPMC vote to release Apache Gearpump (incubating) 0.8.1-RC3 has passed.
We would like to now submit this release candidate to the IPMC.
The PPMC vote thread is here:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d
19 matches
Mail list logo
