Re: Incubator Proposal

Unsubscribe On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 4:42 PM Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > On 5/8/2019 11:31 AM, Matthew Houston wrote: > > At the end, the intention in the initial use case is to equate three > > scriptures to Aramaic, and in so doing eliminate a large portion of Al > > Qaida's ability to recruit. >

Re: Incubator Proposal

Hi - A few points about the Apache Software Foundation and Incubation. (1) Projects work best when they bring in both a small community of developers and a codebase. (2) Projects learn the Apache Way of project governance which includes releasing under the Apache License. Until you do have a c

Re: Incubator Proposal

On 5/8/2019 11:31 AM, Matthew Houston wrote: > At the end, the intention in the initial use case is to equate three > scriptures to Aramaic, and in so doing eliminate a large portion of Al > Qaida's ability to recruit. I'm afraid that this would disqualify me from supporting this proposal not beca

Re: Incubator proposal template

I think Joe hit the nail on the head. Its the mentors that help to guide a project. If the mentors don't get it the project is off to a shaky start. On May 29, 2010, at 5:05 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote: > Frankly the whole idea seems misdirected at incoming projects, > when it should be directed at

Re: Incubator proposal template

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote: > > > - Original Message > >> From: Upayavira >> To: general@incubator.apache.org >> Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:58:21 PM >> Subject: Re: Incubator proposal template >> >> On Sat, 201

Re: Incubator proposal template

On 29/05/2010 13:55, Tim Williams wrote: I wonder why the proposal template doesn't explicitly ask the proposers about their belief in the Apache Way? When I'm reviewing proposals I am looking for this in the proposal as a whole. There are plenty of places where this shows through, e.g: Rati

Re: Incubator proposal template

- Original Message > From: Upayavira > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 4:58:21 PM > Subject: Re: Incubator proposal template > > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 08:08 -0700, Joe Schaefer wrote: > I really don't see the upshot, because a

Re: Incubator proposal template

g to avoid this pitfall', but I do get the fact that they're likely to soon enough be re-arrangements of previous attempts. Upayavira > - Original Message > > From: Tim Williams > > To: general@incubator.apache.org > > Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 11:01:02 AM >

Re: Incubator proposal template

I really don't see the upshot, because after a while people will mostly be "plagarizing" the earlier answers of others. - Original Message > From: Tim Williams > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Sat, May 29, 2010 11:01:02 AM > Subject: Re: Incubato

Re: Incubator proposal template

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > Do you seriously expect any answer other than "yay of course" to such a > question?? Hi Sanjiva, Yes, as I'd expect the question to be open-ended.. "Why do you think the Apache Way is a good fit for your project?" (or somesuch) In th

Re: Incubator proposal template

Do you seriously expect any answer other than "yay of course" to such a question?? Sanjiva. On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Tim Williams wrote: > I wonder why the proposal template doesn't explicitly ask the > proposers about their belief in the Apache Way? It asks about > fascination with th

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Olga Natkovich wrote: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PigProposal. We would like to ask that the ASF consider forming a podling according to the proposal. Thanks for all the comments. I've seen no issues raised that should block Pig from entering incubation. Unless something arises before

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On 9/24/07, Doug Cutting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jim Jagielski wrote: > > In other words, if the corporate support > > of the project or podling went away, would they stop > > developing and working on the codebase because they, > > after all, had no allegiance in the code at all? Were > > the

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

I don't find the name provocative either, but the connotations are a bit weird :-P On Sep 24, 2007, at 10:39 AM, "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Doug Cutting wrote: Niclas Hedhman wrote: a) The name "Pig" is somewhat provocative (not kosher/halal) and I would like to hear t

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Doug Cutting wrote: > Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> a) The name "Pig" is somewhat provocative (not kosher/halal) and I >> would like to hear the rationale behind the name, and whether there >> are any willingness to look for another name. > > It is not meant to be provocative. It is named after the an

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

We could add rules indefinitely to make just about anyone not usable... I don't have any issues with Pig. Carl. Yoav Shapira wrote: Hey, On 9/24/07, Doug Cutting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Niclas Hedhman wrote: a) The name "Pig" is somewhat provocative (not kosher/halal) and I w

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Hey, On 9/24/07, Doug Cutting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > a) The name "Pig" is somewhat provocative (not kosher/halal) and I would > > like > > to hear the rationale behind the name, and whether there are any willingness > > to look for another name. > > It is not meant

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Actually we would really like to modify Ruby and Python to support Pig Latin as part of the language: Ubyray and Ythonpay. We have avoided creating our own crippled scripting language, there are just too many in the world, and instead hope to take an existing language and and embedded Pig Latin

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: +1 to the proposal, and I'd be happy to help as a mentor. Sylvain Wallez wrote: I'd be happy to be a mentor too. Thanks! Please feel free to add yourself to the proposal. Doug - To unsubscribe,

RE: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Doug Cutting wrote: > Niclas Hedhman wrote: > > a) The name "Pig" is somewhat provocative (not kosher/halal) and I > > would like to hear the rationale behind the name, and whether there > > are any willingness to look for another name. > It is not meant to be provocative. It is named after the

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Jim Jagielski wrote: In other words, if the corporate support of the project or podling went away, would they stop developing and working on the codebase because they, after all, had no allegiance in the code at all? Were they, in effect, coders-for-hire? Yes, this is a known risk, perhaps the

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On Sep 24, 2007, at 8:22 PM, Craig L Russell wrote: Speaking just for myself, I find the name unusual but not offensive or even provocative. The fact that you wouldn't eat an animal doesn't mean you deny its existence... +1 I find it a fun name, and the one unlikely to infringe on the exi

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On 9/24/07, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Speaking just for myself, I find the name unusual but not offensive > or even provocative. The fact that you wouldn't eat an animal doesn't > mean you deny its existence... And they make good pets in many cultures and are generally acknowled

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Speaking just for myself, I find the name unusual but not offensive or even provocative. The fact that you wouldn't eat an animal doesn't mean you deny its existence... Of course, I thought the language was officially called igpay atinlay. Craig On Sep 24, 2007, at 10:15 AM, Doug Cutting wr

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Niclas Hedhman wrote: a) The name "Pig" is somewhat provocative (not kosher/halal) and I would like to hear the rationale behind the name, and whether there are any willingness to look for another name. It is not meant to be provocative. It is named after the animal and is not an acronym. I

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

Brian McCallister wrote: On Sep 17, 2007, at 5:57 AM, David L Kaminsky wrote: Tomcat - We're open to suggestions regarding the order in which we add bindings to APIs, and doing such bindings isn't terribly hard. If Tomcat is particularly critical as an early demonstration, we ca

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On Sep 24, 2007, at 4:44 AM, Sylvain Wallez wrote: Olga Natkovich wrote: Hi, Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. The proposal is also available on wiki at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PigProposal. We would like to ask that the ASF consider forming a p

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

I am a +1 on the proposal, but I am still unclear, at this point, how Y! is going to align the open source aspects of Pig with their hiring push for Pig developers as per: http://research.yahoo.com/project/pig I guess this is more a general concern about the changing dynamics. First, of cour

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Olga Natkovich wrote: > Hi, > > Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. The > proposal is also available on wiki at > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PigProposal. > We would like to ask that the ASF consider forming a podling according to > the proposal. > High

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Niclas Hedhman wrote: [...] > > b) I can't say that I understand the technical merits of the proposal, and > just see the headline "analyzing large data sets". And I would like to know > the relationship with UIMA's statement "... analyze large volumes of > unstructured information..." and hear

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

+1 -- I'd offer to help as much as I can, but I know how little that is right now :-( Definitely support (and will probably use at least ;-) -Brian On Sep 18, 2007, at 12:52 PM, Olga Natkovich wrote: Hi, Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. The proposal

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

On Sep 17, 2007, at 5:57 AM, David L Kaminsky wrote: Tomcat - We're open to suggestions regarding the order in which we add bindings to APIs, and doing such bindings isn't terribly hard. If Tomcat is particularly critical as an early demonstration, we can add that to the propo

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On Wednesday 19 September 2007 03:52, Olga Natkovich wrote: > We would like to ask that the ASF consider forming a podling according to > the proposal. +1, but I also got a couple of observations. a) The name "Pig" is somewhat provocative (not kosher/halal) and I would like to hear the rationale

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

+1 -Jim On Sep 18, 2007, at 3:52 PM, Olga Natkovich wrote: Hi, Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. The proposal is also available on wiki at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PigProposal. We would like to ask t

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

+1 from me, too. It looks very promising. :-) On 9/21/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9/18/07, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ...We would like to ask that the ASF consider forming a podling > according to > > the proposal > > +1 to the proposal, and

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On 9/18/07, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...We would like to ask that the ASF consider forming a podling according to > the proposal +1 to the proposal, and I'd be happy to help as a mentor. -Bertrand - To un

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Done! On 20.09.2007, at 19:46, Doug Cutting wrote: Torsten Curdt wrote: +1 Actually I would also be interested in stepping up as a mentor. Thanks, that'd be great! Please add yourself to the proposal in the wiki. Doug - T

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Big +1! :) Otis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simpy -- http://www.simpy.com/ - Tag - Search - Share - Original Message From: Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: general@incubator.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 3:52:23 PM Subject: Incu

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Torsten Curdt wrote: +1 Actually I would also be interested in stepping up as a mentor. Thanks, that'd be great! Please add yourself to the proposal in the wiki. Doug - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For addition

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On 20.09.2007, at 19:06, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: On 9/20/07, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sep 18, 2007, at 9:52 PM, Olga Natkovich wrote: Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. The proposal is also available on wiki at

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On 9/20/07, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 18, 2007, at 9:52 PM, Olga Natkovich wrote: > > Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal > > below. The > > proposal is also available on wiki at > > > > http://wiki.apac

Re: [Fwd: Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL]

need. > > I don't think we'll need quite the same breadth of policy languages, but I > also don't think we'll get down to one. > > David > > > > > > > > > > Original Message > > Subject:Re: Incubator P

Re: [Fwd: Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL]

guages, but I also don't think we'll get down to one. David > > > Original Message > Subject:Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL > Date:Tue, 18 Sep 2007 16:36:03 -0400 > From:Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To:general@in

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On Sep 18, 2007, at 9:52 PM, Olga Natkovich wrote: Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. The proposal is also available on wiki at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PigProposal. We would like to ask that the ASF cons

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On Sep 18, 2007, at 2:45 PM, Doug Cutting wrote: Garrett Rooney wrote: (if anything it seems like a new TLP associated with hadoop and generic distributed computing tools like pig that are built on top of hadoop seems like it would make more sense than just a pig TLP), Yes, I agree. But tha

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Yoav Shapira wrote: It should be clear to everyone involved, though, that part of the goal of incubation is to diversify the project's community so that it's not disjoint from everyone else. I hope to have a bunch of non-Yahoo people contributing to the project. Indeed. That's the primary rea

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Garrett Rooney wrote: (if anything it seems like a new TLP associated with hadoop and generic distributed computing tools like pig that are built on top of hadoop seems like it would make more sense than just a pig TLP), Yes, I agree. But that's not happened yet, and the Pig folks are ready t

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On 9/18/07, Doug Cutting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Garrett Rooney wrote: > > Is there any particular reason you want this podling to be sponsored > > by the Incubator PMC (which is generally done for projects that intend > > to turn into their own top level project) rather than having it > > spo

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

+1 as well. I would be happy to help with code contributions and user testing. Yoav Shapira-2 wrote: > > Hey, > > On 9/18/07, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. >> The >> proposal is also available on wiki at >>

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

Hi all, Over at Directory we have an initial attempt at an identity solution in place called Triplesec. It does the usual AAA with some additional things like mobile keyfobs however it's authorization policy management features might benefit from this project or there may be some overlap. Here's

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On 9/18/07, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. The > proposal is also available on wiki at > > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/PigProposal. > We would like to ask

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

On 9/18/07, Lawrence Mandel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Is there any particular reason you want this podling to be sponsored > >by the Incubator PMC (which is generally done for projects that intend > >to turn into their own top level project) > > Is this true? I thought all new projects had to g

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

r project that plans to graduate and join the WS PMC. [1] http://incubator.apache.org/woden/ Lawrence "Garrett Rooney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/18/2007 04:02 PM Please respond to general@incubator.apache.org To general@incubator.apache.org cc Subje

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Hey, On 9/18/07, Doug Cutting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > overlap a bit, but, to the primary folks involved, it feels like a > separate community and they'd prefer to aim for a TLP. It should be clear to everyone involved, though, that part of the goal of incubation is to diversify the project's

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Garrett Rooney wrote: Is there any particular reason you want this podling to be sponsored by the Incubator PMC (which is generally done for projects that intend to turn into their own top level project) rather than having it sponsored by the Lucene PMC (where Hadoop currently resides)? It seems

Re: Incubator Proposal: Pig

Hey, On 9/18/07, Olga Natkovich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yahoo! research and development teams have developed a proposal below. The > proposal is also available on wiki at > Looks very cool to me. +1 to accepting Pig as an Incubator project. I'

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

Noel J. Bergman wrote: We proposed to develop a policy-based management infrastructure that automates administrative tasks by executing policies Sounds good. I will be curious to see the reaction from the HTTP Server folks, but this sort of thing is very much needed in real-world deployme

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

The DMTF patent policy is here: http://www.dmtf.org/about/policies/patent-10-18-01.pdf The DMTF does not have any IP in any of its specs and unless DMTF is explicitly notified of such, neither do any of the members. -- mark Craig L Russell wrote: Hi David, Thanks for the clarifications. On

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

Subject

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

Hi Mark, Thanks for that. I also found other documents on the site [1] to be relevant, in particular the cover page of [2]. I have no further issues with the IP aspect of this proposal, and suggest that references to [1] and [2] and [3] be included in the updated proposal to head off futu

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

Hi David, Thanks for the clarifications. On Sep 17, 2007, at 5:57 AM, David L Kaminsky wrote: On the standard itself, not surprisingly, the DMTF encourages implementations, and at submission, the DMTF requires this text: "Permission to copy, display, perform, modify and distribute the specifi

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

On Saturday 15 September 2007 02:11, David L Kaminsky wrote: > "Simplified Policy Language" (SPL), a standards-based policy language. Incubator has been discouraging naming projects after domains or standards. Once you come with a suitable name, you'll have my +1 for Incubation. Cheers -- Nicl

RE: Incubator Proposal: SPL

> We proposed to develop a policy-based management infrastructure that > automates administrative tasks by executing policies Sounds good. I will be curious to see the reaction from the HTTP Server folks, but this sort of thing is very much needed in real-world deployments of app servers. > The

Re: Incubator Proposal: SPL

Hi, A few comments on this proposal. On Sep 14, 2007, at 11:11 AM, David L Kaminsky wrote: The design of SPL, a Preliminary DMTF standard, is inspired by existing policy languages and models including PDL (policy definition language) from Bell Laboratories, the Ponder policy language from Imp