Re: [DISCUSS] running a trial where podlings need to have their names reviewed before they join

I think, it makes total sense to do the name search after approval but before onboarding, provided the name search can be done quickly (1-2 weeks max? I'm not sure). Perhaps a separate topic, it would be beneficial to conduct a survey to assess the current onboarding process and identify any ar

Re: OpenClovis SAFplus-Availability-Scalability-Platform would like to join Apache Incubator

Hi Hung, The next step would be to put together a proposal. An example is: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/Iggy+Proposal The are other proposals in: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/Proposals The format is a set format. I can act as champion. If you

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OzHera (incubating) 2.2.5-incubating-rc5

+0 binding Source release seems ok. I still have issues with the binary artifact (apache-ozhera-2.2.5-incubating-bin.tar.gz). Its license lists lots of run.mone libs that appear to be from Xiaomi but the github URLs in the license don't work. I want to report issues on these libs because some

Re: podling security issues

As a concrete proposal, can I suggest adding a question to the podling report. Something like: Is the podling PPMC being responsive to email threads on the private mailing list (don't discuss specific instances here because the threads are private)? I know this is a long winded question that rea

[VOTE] Release Apache Seata-go(incubating) SDK 2.0.0-RC1

Hello, This is the first release of Apache Seata-go(incubating) SDK. The vote thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/6yym26plkrf4ld6s0bf9zts5wwwg0gtq Vote Result: https://lists.apache.org/thread/ko9hf9t9wp14wzgoxcks5cyglg68jrpb The release candidates: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/i

Re: [DISCUSS] running a trial where podlings need to have their names reviewed before they join

> On Mar 6, 2025, at 3:20 PM, PJ Fanning wrote: > > We do have a Clutch Report. > > https://incubator.apache.org/clutch/ > > And you can drill in on each podling to get some finer grained progress > details. The clutch report depends in part on our ancient status xml files which are hand e

[VOTE] Release Apache Seata (Incubating) 2.1.0-RC5

Hello, This is the first release of Apache Seata-go(incubating) SDK. The vote thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/6yym26plkrf4ld6s0bf9zts5wwwg0gtq Vote Result: https://lists.apache.org/thread/ko9hf9t9wp14wzgoxcks5cyglg68jrpb The release candidates: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/

Re: [DISCUSS] running a trial where podlings need to have their names reviewed before they join

On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 17:21, Niall Pemberton wrote: > On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 14:53, PJ Fanning wrote: > > > Seems best to allow the discussion thread to proceed and if things seem > > ok, then start the name approval step. The vote only happens after the > name > > is approved by Brand Management

Re: [DISCUSS] running a trial where podlings need to have their names reviewed before they join

On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 14:53, PJ Fanning wrote: > Seems best to allow the discussion thread to proceed and if things seem > ok, then start the name approval step. The vote only happens after the name > is approved by Brand Management. Does it have to be strict in where it takes place in the proc

Re: podling security issues

A simple yes/no question about the subscribers to the private list seems fine to me. On Thu, 6 Mar 2025 at 17:47, Craig Russell wrote: > > Related, should we ask the podling if all PPMC members (and only PPMC members > or invited outsiders) are subscribed to the private mail list? > > Craig > >

[VOTE] Release Apache Seata (Incubating) 2.1.0-RC5

Hello, This is the first release of Apache Seata-go(incubating) SDK. The vote thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/6yym26plkrf4ld6s0bf9zts5wwwg0gtq Vote Result: https://lists.apache.org/thread/ko9hf9t9wp14wzgoxcks5cyglg68jrpb The release candidates: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/de

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Teaclave TrustZone SDK (incubating) v0.4.0-rc.1

Would it be possible to do a new RC that addresses the LICENSE issue that Jean-Baptiste Onofré mentioned? If you do a new RC, then switching to the standard DISCLAIMER could be done too. One technical issue with the vote email is that it uses the wrong link for the KEYS file. Votes should point

Re: [DISCUSS] running a trial where podlings need to have their names reviewed before they join

On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 9:32 AM PJ Fanning wrote: > Hi everyone, > > This has been discussed on the private mailing list and ASF members > can view the main discussion here [1]. > > Mark Thomas, VP of Brand Management, has suggested a willingness to do > the Podling Name Search at the start of the

Re: [DISCUSS] running a trial where podlings need to have their names reviewed before they join

Seems best to allow the discussion thread to proceed and if things seem ok, then start the name approval step. The vote only happens after the name is approved by Brand Management. On 2025/03/06 14:45:45 Calvin Kirs wrote: > If the Brand team has no objections, then I’m absolutely +1. > > But

Re: [DISCUSS] running a trial where podlings need to have their names reviewed before they join

If the Brand team has no objections, then I’m absolutely +1. But procedurally, should this happen after the discussion and before the vote? On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 10:32 PM PJ Fanning wrote: > Hi everyone, > > This has been discussed on the private mailing list and ASF members > can view the mai

[DISCUSS] running a trial where podlings need to have their names reviewed before they join

Hi everyone, This has been discussed on the private mailing list and ASF members can view the main discussion here [1]. Mark Thomas, VP of Brand Management, has suggested a willingness to do the Podling Name Search at the start of the onboarding process. Can I suggest that we trial out having th