There are 3 binding approving votes and 2 non-binding votes, all of which
are following:
binding votes:
- John D. Ament
- Henry Saputra
- Justin Mclean
non-binding votes:
- Ivam Firestone
- Jia Zhai
There are no disapproving votes.
We will proceed with this release as staged.
Thanks everyone
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Checked the source packages:
> - incubating in name
> - signature and hashes correct
> - DISCLAIMER exists
> - LICENSE and NOTICE are good
> - No unexpected binaries
> - All source files have ASF headers
> - Can comp
Thank you Justin!
- Sijie
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:52 PM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Oh, my bad. I didn't check that. I was just counting the votes. So we
> need
> > one more binding vote for approving this release?
>
> You now have one more binding vote so can release.
>
> Thanks,
> Jus
Hi,
> Oh, my bad. I didn't check that. I was just counting the votes. So we need
> one more binding vote for approving this release?
You now have one more binding vote so can release.
Thanks,
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ge
Hi,
+1 (binding)
Checked the source packages:
- incubating in name
- signature and hashes correct
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE and NOTICE are good
- No unexpected binaries
- All source files have ASF headers
- Can compile from source
I did notice two MIT licenses [1][2] but the other than the l
Oh, my bad. I didn't check that. I was just counting the votes. So we need
one more binding vote for approving this release?
- Sijie
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 5:11 PM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> Sijie,
>
> I can't find anyone by the name of Ivam Firestone on the IPMC. Please
> double check your bind
Sijie,
I can't find anyone by the name of Ivam Firestone on the IPMC. Please
double check your binding votes.
http://home.apache.org/phonebook.html?ctte=incubator
John
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:44 PM Sijie Guo wrote:
> There are 3 binding approving votes, all of which are following:
>
> - Iv
There are 3 binding approving votes, all of which are following:
- Ivam Firestone
- John D. Ament
- Henry Saputra
There are no disapproving votes.
We will proceed with this release as staged.
Thanks everyone!
- Sijie
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Sijie Guo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please
+1 (binding)
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Sijie Guo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please review and vote on the release candidate #4 for the Apache
> DistributedLog version 0.4.0-incubating, as follows:
>
> [ ] +1, Approve the release
> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific com
Thank you all. Can any IPMC member help review and vote this?
Sijie
On Apr 19, 2017 4:47 AM, "Jia Zhai" wrote:
> +1(non-binding)
> - verified packages (md5, asc and sha1 all look good)
> - the source package build and test all run successfully.
> - NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, License headers look good.
+1(non-binding)
- verified packages (md5, asc and sha1 all look good)
- the source package build and test all run successfully.
- NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, License headers look good.
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 8:36 PM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> +1 to release
>
> - NOTICE file looks fine
> - Source headers l
+1 to release
- NOTICE file looks fine
- Source headers look correct
- DISCLAIMER present.
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 2:55 AM Sijie Guo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Please review and vote on the release candidate #4 for the Apache
> DistributedLog version 0.4.0-incubating, as follows:
>
> [ ] +1, Approve
+1
Get Outlook for Android
From: Sijie Guo
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2:55 AM
Subject: [VOTE] Apache DistributedLog release 0.4.0-incubating (RC#4)
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: d...@distributedlog.incubator.apache.org
Hi all, Please review and vote on the release candidate
Hi all,
Please review and vote on the release candidate #4 for the Apache
DistributedLog version 0.4.0-incubating, as follows:
[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
The complete staging area is available for your review, which includes:
Awesome. I learned a lot from this discussion. We will address these
comments and call another vote.
- Sijie
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Marvin Humphrey
wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra
> wrote:
> > The question is whether we need to keep this section:
> >
> > Porti
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 5:06 PM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Agreed, however this is where it gets complicated (and at least needs to be
> clear to the contributors, or maybe I'm the only one thinking this is
> confusing/not obvious). The ASF accepts contributions from individuals,
> not companies.
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 7:24 PM Josh Elser wrote:
> Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra
> wrote:
> >> The question is whether we need to keep this section:
> >>
> >> Portions of this software were developed by Twitter.
> >> Copyright Twitter, 2017
> >>
> >> i
Thanks for the review guys, will come back to dev@ list to update the
release artifacts.
- Henry
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The question is whether we need to keep this section:
Marvin Humphrey wrote:
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
The question is whether we need to keep this section:
Portions of this software were developed by Twitter.
Copyright Twitter, 2017
in the NOTICE file. Since Twitter already signed off the source
contributions, we cou
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Henry Saputra wrote:
> The question is whether we need to keep this section:
>
> Portions of this software were developed by Twitter.
> Copyright Twitter, 2017
>
> in the NOTICE file. Since Twitter already signed off the source
> contributions, we could probably re
The question is whether we need to keep this section:
Portions of this software were developed by Twitter.
Copyright Twitter, 2017
in the NOTICE file. Since Twitter already signed off the source
contributions, we could probably remove this section.
As for initial Copyright notice, we should put
Thank you, Josh. Will address your comments.
On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> -1 (binding) your source releases still do not contain the DISCLAIMER file
> that John pointed out in rc2 [1].
>
> * mvn apache-rat:check fails on `src/main/resources/DISCLAIMER.bin.txt`
* Don't inc
-1 (binding) your source releases still do not contain the DISCLAIMER
file that John pointed out in rc2 [1].
* mvn apache-rat:check fails on `src/main/resources/DISCLAIMER.bin.txt`
* Don't include 'Copyright 2017 The Apache Software Foundation' in the
license headers of your source files. The N
Hi everyone,
Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 for the Apache
DistributedLog version 0.4.0-incubating, as follows:
[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
The complete staging area is available for your review, whi
On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Sijie Guo wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:37 PM, Justin Mclean
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > I think they might come from apache bookkeeper. when we started building
>> > DL, we might copy some headers from bookkeeper. We will address this in
>> > next RC.
>>
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:37 PM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > I think they might come from apache bookkeeper. when we started building
> > DL, we might copy some headers from bookkeeper. We will address this in
> > next RC.
>
> Look like they may of also fixed this issue [1]. For why see the
Hi,
> I think they might come from apache bookkeeper. when we started building
> DL, we might copy some headers from bookkeeper. We will address this in
> next RC.
Look like they may of also fixed this issue [1]. For why see the last bit of
Step 2 here [2]. I assume there’s no code from bookkeep
Hello, Justin,
Thank you so much for you feedback.
On Jan 26, 2017 6:26 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
Hi,
I also be -1 binding on this due to missing DISCLAIMER, ASF header issues
and a possible binary release issue.
I checked:
- name includes incubating
- signatures good
- DISCLAIMER is missing
Hi,
I also be -1 binding on this due to missing DISCLAIMER, ASF header issues and a
possible binary release issue.
I checked:
- name includes incubating
- signatures good
- DISCLAIMER is missing
- License is OK
- Year needs updating in NOTICE.
- A large number of files seem to have have incorrec
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:27 PM Sijie Guo wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 6:06 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
> > Its not clear if you intended this to be the IPMC vote or the dev vote.
> >
>
> Sorry. it is my first time doing incubator project release. If I made
> something wrong, please let me
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 6:06 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
> Its not clear if you intended this to be the IPMC vote or the dev vote.
>
Sorry. it is my first time doing incubator project release. If I made
something wrong, please let me know.
This is vote is intended to for the IPMC vote.
>
> -1 Si
Its not clear if you intended this to be the IPMC vote or the dev vote.
-1 Since the release does not include the DISCLAIMER file and README does
not include the DISCLAIMER text (either would be fine per policy, but
generally we look for DISCLAIMER).
There were no binaries in the source. NOTICE
Hi everyone,
Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the Apache
DistributedLog version 0.4.0-incubating, as follows:
[ ] +1, Approve the release
[ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific comments)
The complete staging area is available for your
33 matches
Mail list logo
