Hi,
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 2:00 PM Gosling Von wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> +1 binding(only on source)
>
> I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - DISCLAIMER exits
> - LICENSE and NOTICE are fine. I notice you have listed some css dependencies
> as APL 2.0 license. But some other dependency such as vue.js
Hi,
+1 binding(only on source)
I checked:
- incubating in name
- DISCLAIMER exits
- LICENSE and NOTICE are fine. I notice you have listed some css dependencies
as APL 2.0 license. But some other dependency such as vue.js is also the same
case. If we could hope for list all dependencies for comp
Hi,
Thanks to everyone, and the vote for releasing Apache Doris
0.9.0-incubating-rc02 is now closed.
It has passed with 4 +1 (binding) votes and no 0 or -1 votes.
Binding:
+1 Willem Jiang
+1 Justin Mclean
+1 ShaoFeng Shi
+1 Makoto Yui
The vote thread:
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/da05fd
Hi,
+1 (binding)
I checked
- incubator in name
- LICENSE and NOTICE are fine
- DISCLAIMER file
- sha512 and asc signature are good
- rat check passed
The following showed some files not including ASF license headers
but they were borrowed codes
$ java -jar apache-rat-0.12/apache-rat-0.12.j
+1 (non-Binding).
Gone through discussion thread, it will greatly help in knowing the
ecosystem.
May we can extend to certification also..?
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 1:08 AM Kenneth Knowles wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Looking forward to this.
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:11 AM Woonsan Ko wrote:
Hi,
> In this case, if we want to let source release pass, do we need 3 +1
> binding vote or 4 +1 binding vote?
I say only 3+1, but double check with Mark if his +1 still applies in this case.
Thanks,
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-
Hi Justin,
In this case, if we want to let source release pass, do we need 3 +1
binding vote or 4 +1 binding vote?
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 10:37 AM Justin Mclean wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > One of our mentor, Mark, has voted +1 on the dev@ list [1]
> >
> > Can we count it as binding on the general@ vot
+1 binding,
Checked the license file, the notice, the signature, the sha512 hash, all
looks good; (I didn't run build as my docker is broken)
Best regards,
Shaofeng Shi 史少锋
Apache Kylin PMC
Work email: shaofeng@kyligence.io
Kyligence Inc: https://kyligence.io/
Apache Kylin FAQ: https://kyli
Hi,
> One of our mentor, Mark, has voted +1 on the dev@ list [1]
>
> Can we count it as binding on the general@ vote?
He's an IPMC member so yes that counts.
Thanks.
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubat
Hi,
One of our mentor, Mark, has voted +1 on the dev@ list [1]
Can we count it as binding on the general@ vote?
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/61b7e43b5813c794ef45e7d95dff9c0744ac2d70556ae7ff195405ee@%3Cdev.dubbo.apache.org%3E
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 11:00 PM Minxuan Zhuang wrote:
>
Perfectly fine naming suggestion. thanks, Dave.
"Apache Zipkin Brave (incubating) for Apache Karaf"
I will put that into a pull request and suspect no-one will contest it.
-A
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019, 7:43 AM Dave Fisher Hi Adrian,
>
> (NOTE - cross posted to private lists. Take care with replies.
Hi Adrian,
(NOTE - cross posted to private lists. Take care with replies.)
Thanks for your patience regarding the branding issue I mentioned.
> On Feb 14, 2019, at 4:29 AM, Adrian Cole wrote:
> Finally, there was an unresolved question about branding of the repo. I
> dont think we should att
Hi,
Changing my vote to +1 binding.
> On the copyright dates in NOTICE
It not actually required just helpful and best if you mention the year of
publication, most projects seem to including the starting year.
> Copyright 2014 and onwards The Apache Software Foundation.
Please don’t do this, c
+1 (binding)
Looking forward to this.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:11 AM Woonsan Ko wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> Cool!
>
> Woonsan
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 2:58 AM Lars Francke
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The
> > pro
+1 (binding)
Cool!
Woonsan
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 2:58 AM Lars Francke wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The
> proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3].
>
> According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept
On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 14:38, Lars Francke wrote:
> I'm not sure if I understand the question. Could you rephrase?
> Do you mean training on "The Apache Way"?
Essentially, yes.
--
Matt Sicker
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general
Hi,
I prepared the dist/dev [1]. I hope this is enough to restart vote. If yes, I
will reply to this thread with [RESTARTING] .
Mavenized artefacts [3] not changed.
On the copyright dates in NOTICE,
it's seems that on the sample given [2] it's a range between 2 years, it
appears that other Ap
We would really prefer us to not have to add a non standard and explicit
line in the NOTICE file about "The OpenZipkin Authors" as it doesnt exist
as a legal entity and even if it did, it didn't sign an SGA.
We would like that to not only be a non-blocker for this release, but also
subsequent ones
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 6:35 AM Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I can follow up with the developer to fix their headers via a github
> issue (if no one else gets to it before me).
>
> I already have raise it as an issue :-) Add to it it if you want. [1]
>
> > Including prior statements about NO
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 3:22 AM Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 09:15, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
>
> > In the particular case of the "MavenWrapperDownloader.java" file, I would
> > say it is OK not to mention it in the LICENSE/NOTICE files, as per the
> > existing policy [1]. The proj
Hi,
> I can follow up with the developer to fix their headers via a github issue
> (if no one else gets to it before me).
I already have raise it as an issue :-) Add to it it if you want. [1]
> Including prior statements about NOTICE is completely optional, but in the
> case of no SGA would be
Hi all,
I just want to point out that the issue is that MavenWrapperDownloader has
incorrect license headers in its source repository, see [1]. We should not
fault Apache projects for leveraging this, since the upstream is not
properly setup. I can follow up with the developer to fix their heade
Hi,
> Would a rename of the artefacts (zip,asc,sha512)in the
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator to be enough ?
That would work for me as long as the released artefacts also have that name.
No need for a revote on the PPMC.
> If possible I would like to keep the NOTICE file in 2
Hi Justin,
Thanks for the answer.
Would a rename of the artefacts (zip,asc,sha512)in the
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator to be enough ? Should I cancel
and restart a vote PPMC + IPMC ?
If possible I would like to keep the NOTICE file in 2017-2018 for this first
incubating
Thank you, Justin, we will fix the license issue in next release.
On 2019/2/14 上午10:39， "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>+1 binding but LICENSE is missing a couple of licenses please fix in next
>release.
>
>Checked:
>- incubating in name
>- hashes and signatures good
>- LICENSE is missing some li
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 09:15, Ignasi Barrera wrote:
> In the particular case of the "MavenWrapperDownloader.java" file, I would
> say it is OK not to mention it in the LICENSE/NOTICE files, as per the
> existing policy [1]. The project does not contain a NOTICE file, so there
> is nothing to prop
FYI I've asked takari to donate the wrapper to the ASF. It is
important but tiny
https://github.com/takari/takari-maven-plugin/issues/18
Meanwhile, we will remove the wrapper from the source distribution as
putting it in the NOTICE file is something off-putting to a few of our
contributors. We can
In the particular case of the "MavenWrapperDownloader.java" file, I would
say it is OK not to mention it in the LICENSE/NOTICE files, as per the
existing policy [1]. The project does not contain a NOTICE file, so there
is nothing to propagate there, and policy says that if the bundled
dependency is
28 matches
Mail list logo
