+1
I checked:
- name
- disclaimer
- license and notice
- build successfully
- asf headers
Thanks,
William
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 1:32 PM Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - signatures and hashes good
> - DISCLAIMER exists
> - LICENSE and NOT
+1 (non-binding)
Great to see this here!
> Am 14.11.2018 um 04:07 schrieb James Taylor :
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 4:15 PM Willem Jiang wrote:
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> Willem Jiang
>>
>> Twitter: willemjiang
>> Weibo: 姜宁willem
>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 1:07 AM Ryan
Hi,
+1 (binding)
I checked:
- incubating in name
- signatures and hashes good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE and NOTICE correct
- no unexpected binary files in releases
- all source files have ASF headers
- can compile from source
One very tiny issue is that Gogo protobuf isn’t a BSD 3 clause li
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 4:15 PM Willem Jiang wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Willem Jiang
>
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 1:07 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
> >
> > The discuss thread seems to have reached consensus, so I propose
> accepting
> > the Iceberg p
+1.
I also think Weex needs more guidance from more mentors, they can give
advice from different perspectives. On the other hand, most PPMC and
committers of Weex are Chinese, we wish Weex can absorb ideas form
more world-wide developers from different cultures. Looking forward to your
opinions.
+1. (Binding)
build and test successfully.
Best Regards!
-
Luke Han
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 2:53 AM Willem Jiang wrote:
> +1. (Binding)
>
> 1. Checked signed key and sha512 of source and binary package of
> 2. Source code build successfully
> 3. LICENSE and NOTICE are OK
+1 to both from me too!
On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 12:22 PM Roman Shaposhnik
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:28 AM Bertrand Delacretaz
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean
> wrote:
> > > ...I propose this:
> > >
> > > If someone has done several of the foll
+1 (binding)
Willem Jiang
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem
On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 1:07 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
>
> The discuss thread seems to have reached consensus, so I propose accepting
> the Iceberg project for incubation.
>
> The proposal is copied below and in the wiki:
> https://wiki.a
I also agree that moving to a different URL would be disruptive. In Apache
Groovy, we have a separate directory for the official (source) release as
distinct from the convenience binaries which are in a separate directory. I
think we copied the approach from Apache Ant. Our release notes stress the
The package looks good to me +1
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 3:43 PM Neng Lu wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This vote has been open for 8 days. If you have some time, please provide
> any feedback to help us improve.
> Thank you very much!
>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:31 AM Neng Lu wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
Hi Ariam, thanks for your chat. Please let us know if you have more
questions about the incubator or if we can help with any other avenues.
It's a great project!
KAM
On 11/12/2018 12:38 AM, Ariam Mogos wrote:
>
> Hi Kevin,
>
>
>
> I’m sorry, last week in DC ended up being very difficult, b
Personally, given the amount of binary releases that are distributed off of
our very own infrastructure (and I'm not even counting our namespace
on things like Docker hub -- I'm just talking about the INFRA we run) I don't
think that the argument "binary releases are NOT endorsed by ASF" will
fly v
+1 (binding)
On 11/13/2018 12:40 PM, Julian Hyde wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Julian
>
>
>> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Arthur Wiedmer wrote:
>>
>> +1
>>
>> (Non-binding)
>>
>> Best,
>> Arthur
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 09:24 Hugo Louro >
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:19 AM,
+1 (binding)
Julian
> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Arthur Wiedmer wrote:
>
> +1
>
> (Non-binding)
>
> Best,
> Arthur
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 09:24 Hugo Louro
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>>> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Owen O'Malley
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
On Tue, Nov 13,
+1
(Non-binding)
Best,
Arthur
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 09:24 Hugo Louro +1 (non-binding)
>
> > On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Owen O'Malley
> wrote:
> >
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 12:12 PM Dave Fisher
> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 (binding)
> >>
> >>> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:10 AM, Ma
+1 (non-binding)
> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Owen O'Malley wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 12:12 PM Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>>> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:10 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 binding
>>>
On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:09, Ryan Blue wro
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 12:12 PM Dave Fisher wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> > On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:10 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
> >
> > +1 binding
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:09, Ryan Blue wrote:
> >
> >> +1 (binding)
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:06 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
> >>
+1 (binding)
> On Nov 13, 2018, at 9:10 AM, Matt Sicker wrote:
>
> +1 binding
>
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:09, Ryan Blue wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:06 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
>>
>>> The discuss thread seems to have reached consensus, so I propose
>> accepting
>>>
+1 binding
On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 at 11:09, Ryan Blue wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:06 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
>
> > The discuss thread seems to have reached consensus, so I propose
> accepting
> > the Iceberg project for incubation.
> >
> > The proposal is copied below and in th
+1 (non binding)
awesome to see this is taken forward to the incubator and looking forward
to collaborate with the community!
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:09 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:06 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
>
> > The discuss thread seems to have reached con
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 9:06 AM Ryan Blue wrote:
> The discuss thread seems to have reached consensus, so I propose accepting
> the Iceberg project for incubation.
>
> The proposal is copied below and in the wiki:
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IcebergProposal
>
> Please vote o
The discuss thread seems to have reached consensus, so I propose accepting
the Iceberg project for incubation.
The proposal is copied below and in the wiki:
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/IcebergProposal
Please vote on whether to accept Iceberg in the next 72 hours:
[ ] +1, accept Iceberg for
It sounds like there is consensus, so I'll start a vote thread. Thanks,
everyone, for looking at the proposal!
rb
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 1:27 AM Lars Francke wrote:
> I've been following the Iceberg project on and off for a while now and I
> think this is desperately needed. I don't claim to u
I've been following the Iceberg project on and off for a while now and I
think this is desperately needed. I don't claim to understand all of the
details but I'm very happy to hear this being proposed for Apache. I think
it'd be a great fit. Thank you Ryan and everyone else working on this so
far.
24 matches
Mail list logo
