On 2/8/08, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On that note, since there has been so discussion on this thread, I
> think it might be time to open another thread and formally decide
> whether to accept the Thrift proposal, which I will go do now.
That was my aim. I didn't want the proposal con
On that note, since there has been so discussion on this thread, I
think it might be time to open another thread and formally decide
whether to accept the Thrift proposal, which I will go do now.
-Ted.
On Feb 7, 2008 9:14 AM, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +1 to Ted's message. I am
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"Santiago Gala" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008 2:48 PM, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
snip...
1. You have to use subversion.
Why? Has been a vote done? where? I vote +1 for git if
+1 to Ted's message. I am not trying to sabotage the proposal, just
trying to point out the potential problems you might run into during
incubation/at graduation.
IIUC, you can release code that is completely vetted, so if parts are
still unvetted, it would not prevent you from releasing the check
Yes, there is a subtle disjoint or two. :)
Excluding patches that simply modify an existing artifact, we do need
licensing agreements from all individual contributors, regardless of
whether they become ASF committers or members of the podling PMC.
Otherwise, the ASF does not have clear title to th
On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 15:48 -0800, Mark Slee wrote:
> Well, note that this isn't strictly an IP issue. The issue here was the
> committers list, not the IP of the code. I don't see why all the code
> would need to be written by people on the initial committers list to
> pass IP restrictions.
>
>
o: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release
> history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first
> release. Anyways,
On Feb 4, 2008, at 3:41 AM, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
On Feb 4, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
And to be quite frank, it feels very counterproductive to me to
remove
code from the project with full a priori intention of putting it
back
in.
Are you sure you will get the appro
On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release
> history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first
> release. Anyways, throwing away the code just to *enter* the Incubator
> is neither required
True
Sorry, you are right. I just doublechecked Cayenne incubator release
history, and we did clear all our IP issues before posting the first
release. Anyways, throwing away the code just to *enter* the Incubator
is neither required nor seems like a good approach.
Andrus
On Feb 4, 2008, at 2:
On 2/4/08, Andrus Adamchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As long as you remember that you can't release or graduate
> without properly
> > audited code with a paper trail to the original author of the code.
>
> You can release from the incubator before all IP is cleared.
No you can't: from the
On Feb 4, 2008, at 1:15 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
And to be quite frank, it feels very counterproductive to me to
remove
code from the project with full a priori intention of putting it back
in.
Are you sure you will get the appropriate ICLA's from all the
authors that
have contribu
On 2/1/08, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> However, dropping parts of the code feels counterproductive to me, as I
> think it might put up a perceived barrier to collaboration with the
> Thrift project.
As long as you remember that you can't release or graduate without properly
audited c
David Reiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> J Aaron Farr wrote:
>> git could be an issue.
>
> Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
Leo already gave a decent explanation.
Basically, it comes down to two aspects:
1) infrastructure support
2) cultural bias
There's no "No git" rule that I
On Feb 2, 2008 2:48 PM, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote:
> > J Aaron Farr wrote:
> >> git could be an issue.
> >
> > Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
>
> Probably not very well :-). Basically, we know how to do the apache-
> style ope
On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:20 AM, David Reiss wrote:
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git?
Probably not very well :-). Basically, we know how to do the apache-
style open source process using centralized version control, we don't
quite know how t
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 17:21 -0800, David Reiss wrote:
> Thanks for the explanations. Maybe it is too early for me to start
> evangelizing, but let me know if either of these factors makes a difference.
>
> 1/ I don't think we would be putting any load on the Apache infrastructure
> team. As M
Thanks for the explanations. Maybe it is too early for me to start
evangelizing, but let me know if either of these factors makes a difference.
1/ I don't think we would be putting any load on the Apache infrastructure
team. As Matthieu said, it would take about five minutes for one of us to
On Feb 1, 2008 4:48 PM, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 16:20 -0800, David Reiss wrote:
> > J Aaron Farr wrote:
> > > git could be an issue.
> >
> > Can you explain what the issue is with Git? We have at least seven
> > contributors (three at Facebook, four external
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 16:20 -0800, David Reiss wrote:
> J Aaron Farr wrote:
> > git could be an issue.
>
> Can you explain what the issue is with Git? We have at least seven
> contributors (three at Facebook, four external) using git-svn right now, and
> I
> know that at least a few of us wou
J Aaron Farr wrote:
git could be an issue.
Can you explain what the issue is with Git? We have at least seven
contributors (three at Facebook, four external) using git-svn right now, and I
know that at least a few of us would really like to use native Git as the main
repository for Thrift.
oposal
>
> For those who prefer reading Wiki markup directly, it is copied below.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
> = Thrift Proposal =
>
> == Abstract ==
> Thrift is a framework for efficient cross-language data serialization,
> RPC, and server programming.
>
> == Propo
spective status for the
sake of transparency and to keep track of the evolution. If you already have
a good idea of what these parts are, maybe this could even be included in
the proposal?
Cheers,
Matthieu
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Martijn Dashorst [
open and moving forwards.
Removing people's code from the project could send an insulting and
negative message.
Cheers,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Martijn Dashorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 10:39 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Re:
On Jan 30, 2008, at 5:55 AM, Upayavira wrote:
As you can see from other proposals, I think you'll find it work
better
with a single committer pool. As others have said, I personally have
never seen a problem with this approach - people steer away from code
that they are unfamiliar with, or t
Niclas is correct - this can create hardships, resentments, control
issues in your community. If it's a simple as "we don't trust you
Java folks on day one to properly indent Python code" I can sympathize
with that concept.
That's about the extent of what we were thinking, but there has been so m
on this?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mark
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mark Slee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 6:07 PM
> > To: general@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: [PROPO
Perhaps in the interest of code audit (which needs to be done) and community
building, the code parts of the missing committers should be removed from
the code drop prior to incubation start, and be re-introduced inside the
incubating podling by providing patches through bugzilla?
Martijn
On 1/30/
If there are people who have already proven their *merit* on the
project that are not included on the initial list of committers then I
think they should be.
> In reality, many parts of the Thrift code base are already entirely
> owned by non-Facebook entities. The Cocoa, C#, Perl, and Smallt
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 11:50 -0500, Ben Maurer wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Upayavira wrote:
> > As you can see from other proposals, I think you'll find it work better
> > with a single committer pool. As others have said, I personally have
> > never seen a problem with this approach - people ste
Yoav Shapira wrote:
On Jan 30, 2008 2:24 AM, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What we'd really
like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
I'm not a huge fan of this, but I love the rest of the proposal, so +
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Upayavira wrote:
As you can see from other proposals, I think you'll find it work better
with a single committer pool. As others have said, I personally have
never seen a problem with this approach - people steer away from code
that they are unfamiliar with, or tend to ask pe
On Jan 30, 2008, at 4:45 PM, J Aaron Farr wrote:
"Mark Slee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Anyone have feedback? If no objections are voiced, when would it be
appropriate for us to move forward with a VOTE thread on this?
Sorry for not responding. I flagged the email when I first saw it but
did
"Mark Slee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anyone have feedback? If no objections are voiced, when would it be
> appropriate for us to move forward with a VOTE thread on this?
Sorry for not responding. I flagged the email when I first saw it but
didn't have time to respond.
Overall the proposal
On Jan 30, 2008 2:24 AM, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What we'd really
> like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
> committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
I'm not a huge fan of this, but I love the rest of the proposal, so +1
to it! I'm also
ework built on Thrift. If accepted into Apache, we'd likely
> also include Scribe as a sub-project or contrib submission to Thrift.
> We'd be interested to hear if that'd be appropriate or what the general
> approach is to subprojects or non-core addons.
>
> Cheers,
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 19:30, Erik Abele wrote:
> In the end they are here to learn The A Way and if it turns out to be
> a problem then they won't be able to graduate so I think it's
> premature to turn down the proposal just because of this.
Correct, but putting it in place increases t
On 30.01.2008, at 10:35, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote:
What we'd really
like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons;
1.
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 23:24 -0800, Mark Slee wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> *If I look at the initial committers list, I see a big portion to be
> facebook developers. During incubation you should work on diversifying.*
>
> *Again, it seems like a huge contingent of facebook developers. You
> really sh
Niclas
I also had exactly the same thoughts on reading the email. I think
learning that committership is a position of trust is a key part of
the incubation process.
So I'm +1 on the proposal, but I would definitely be -1 on graduation
if such a scheme were to be implemented during incubation.
P
Niclas Hedhman schrieb:
> On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote:
>
>> What we'd really
>> like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
>> committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
>>
>
> Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons;
>
> 1
On Wednesday 30 January 2008 15:24, Mark Slee wrote:
> What we'd really
> like to set up here is a system where there are different people with
> committer priveleges to different parts of the project.
Hmmm... I would oppose this for two reasons;
1. Creating boundaries within a project, yet coll
ashorst [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 1:34 AM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
On 1/24/08, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> === Core Developers ===
> Thrift currently has developers across many org
orward with a VOTE thread on this?
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mark Slee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 6:07 PM
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
>
>
On 1/24/08, Mark Slee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> === Core Developers ===
> Thrift currently has developers across many organizations (e.g.
> Facebook, Powerset, ReCaptcha, AmieStreet), many of whom are
> contributors to other open source projects.
If I look at the initial committers list, I s
appropriate for us to move forward with a VOTE thread on this?
Cheers,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Mark Slee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 6:07 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PROPOSAL] Thrift
Hi all,
We've ju
cient cross-language data serialization,
RPC, and server programming.
== Proposal ==
Thrift is a software library and set of code-generation tools designed
to expedite development and implementation of efficient and scalable
backend services. Its primary goal is to enable efficient and reliable
communic
47 matches
Mail list logo
