random comment

[Jacques Nadeau <ja...@dremio.com>]

I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved in. This
is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation.

It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other than the
random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on Github (?)
but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations against the dev
list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we had email
counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs closed/month
number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on the dev list.

What do other people think about this?


On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you have
> anything to add, please reply!
>
> rb
>
> --------------------
> ## Iceberg
>
> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data.
>
> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16.
>
> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before graduating:
>
>   1. Grow the Iceberg community
>   2. Add more committers and PPMC members
>
> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware of?
>
> No issues.
>
> ### How has the community developed since the last report?
>
> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were merged for
> an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the previous monthly
> average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this contribution rate
> is still very active and healthy. Contributions are coming from a regular
> group of contributors outside of the initial set of committers, which is a
> positive indication for adding new committers and PPMC members over the
> next few months.
>
> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg,
> 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and
> included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active
> with community members testing out the release and reporting problems.
>
> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September.
>
> ### How has the project developed since the last report?
>
>   - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0 release
>   - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged into master
>   - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed
>   - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read path is
> near commit
>   - Flaky tests have been fixed
>   - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied to all
> modules
>
> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity?
> Please feel free to add your own commentary.
>
>   - [ ] Initial setup
>   - [ ] Working towards first release
>   - [x] Community building
>   - [x] Nearing graduation
>   - [ ] Other:
>
> ### Date of last release:
>
>   - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019
>
> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?
>
>   - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019
>
> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive?
>
> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote. Thanks to our
> mentors for being active!
>
> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks?
>
> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any issues.
> The project name has been approved.
>
> ### Signed-off-by:
>
>   - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue
>      Comments:
>   - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem
>      Comments:
>   - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley
>      Comments:
>   - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor
>      Comments:
>   - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach
>      Comments:
>
> --
> Ryan Blue
> Software Engineer
> Netflix
>

Re: random comment

[Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.INVALID>]

The update to the Iceberg site has been committed and deployed. Thanks for
fixing this, Jakob.

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 11:59 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com> wrote:

> Thanks Jokob! I've reviewed the PR and will commit it and redeploy the
> site once it's updated.
>
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 11:47 AM Jakob Homan <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The website only lists the dev@, commits@ and private@ lists[1].  I've
>> opened a PR[2] to add the issues@ list to make it more visible to new
>> members of the community.
>>
>> -Jakob
>> [1] https://iceberg.incubator.apache.org/community/
>> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-iceberg/pull/724
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 10:38 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > Github updates are sent to issues@iceberg.apache.org. Sorry for the
>> confusion. The background is that the notifications originally went to the
>> dev list, but the traffic was annoyingly high because it included not just
>> issue or PR creation, but also every individual comment. A few people let
>> us know that they were going to unsubscribe, so we created the issues list
>> for people that wanted to keep up that way. Here's what we reported about
>> it in our January 2019 board report:
>> >
>> > > Gitbox traffic is now going to issues@. The community was losing dev@
>> subscribers because of the high volume of traffic from Gitbox. However, now
>> all updates are sent to issues@. It would be nice to have emails from
>> creation go to dev@, while updates and resolutions would go the issues@.
>> >
>> > There is still a lot of traffic going to issues@, but you can use mail
>> filters to select what you'd like to see.
>> >
>> > I think it's generally okay that most discussion happens on pull
>> requests. I think that's a common pattern across communities for small
>> discussions, while larger discussions tend to happen on the dev list, like
>> the Iceberg community discussions about row-level deletes. Right now, we
>> have been primarily focusing on working on the things that we've already
>> discussed, like getting the vectorization code committed to master.
>> >
>> > rb
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:21 AM Anton Okolnychyi
>> <ao...@apple.com.invalid> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I also think it’s a good idea to have an email thread dedicated to
>> reviews/issues.
>> >>
>> >> - Anton
>> >>
>> >> > On 6 Jan 2020, at 17:06, Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > I also joined the dev@ list to keep abreast of what's going on in
>> >> > Iceberg. If all of the development activity is happening on GitHub
>> >> > issues and pull requests, then it seems like all of this activity
>> >> > should be mirrored to _some_ mailing list, for example
>> >> > github@iceberg.a.o. This creates a searchable archive of the
>> project's
>> >> > history which seems like the goal of the ASF's email list policy.
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jim Apple <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The Impala community is similar, with 50x more code review emails
>> than dev@. Every review and patchset (in Gerrit lingo) produces a new
>> email to reviews@.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@impala.apache.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?reviews@impala.apache.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >> From my personal point of view, it’s possible that Impala should
>> have more design discussions on dev@, but given the volume of code
>> reviews and absent a deep culture and history of distinguishing between
>> what should just be in a code review and what needs to be in a dev@
>> design discussion, things seems to be in balance.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On my soapbox a bit, Gerrit seems to be a much more capable tool
>> that Github’s code review offerings. As a result, my opinion about the
>> balance of where discussions happen is colored by my love for Gerrit, as a
>> user.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@dremio.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved
>> in. This is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other
>> than the random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on
>> Github (?) but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations
>> against the dev list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we
>> had email counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs
>> closed/month number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on
>> the dev list.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> What do other people think about this?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue
>> <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> wrote:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Hi everyone,
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you
>> have anything to add, please reply!
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> rb
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> --------------------
>> >> >>>> ## Iceberg
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before
>> graduating:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>  1. Grow the Iceberg community
>> >> >>>>  2. Add more committers and PPMC members
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be
>> aware of?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> No issues.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### How has the community developed since the last report?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were
>> merged for an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the
>> previous monthly average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this
>> contribution rate is still very active and healthy. Contributions are
>> coming from a regular group of contributors outside of the initial set of
>> committers, which is a positive indication for adding new committers and
>> PPMC members over the next few months.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg,
>> 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and
>> included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active
>> with community members testing out the release and reporting problems.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### How has the project developed since the last report?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>  - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0
>> release
>> >> >>>>  - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged
>> into master
>> >> >>>>  - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed
>> >> >>>>  - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read
>> path is near commit
>> >> >>>>  - Flaky tests have been fixed
>> >> >>>>  - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied
>> to all modules
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity?
>> >> >>>> Please feel free to add your own commentary.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>  - [ ] Initial setup
>> >> >>>>  - [ ] Working towards first release
>> >> >>>>  - [x] Community building
>> >> >>>>  - [x] Nearing graduation
>> >> >>>>  - [ ] Other:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### Date of last release:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>  - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>  - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote.
>> Thanks to our mentors for being active!
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks?
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any
>> issues.
>> >> >>>> The project name has been approved.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> ### Signed-off-by:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>  - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue
>> >> >>>>     Comments:
>> >> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem
>> >> >>>>     Comments:
>> >> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley
>> >> >>>>     Comments:
>> >> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor
>> >> >>>>     Comments:
>> >> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach
>> >> >>>>     Comments:
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> --
>> >> >>>> Ryan Blue
>> >> >>>> Software Engineer
>> >> >>>> Netflix
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ryan Blue
>> > Software Engineer
>> > Netflix
>>
>
>
> --
> Ryan Blue
> Software Engineer
> Netflix
>


-- 
Ryan Blue
Software Engineer
Netflix

Re: random comment

[Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.INVALID>]

Thanks Jokob! I've reviewed the PR and will commit it and redeploy the site
once it's updated.

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 11:47 AM Jakob Homan <jg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The website only lists the dev@, commits@ and private@ lists[1].  I've
> opened a PR[2] to add the issues@ list to make it more visible to new
> members of the community.
>
> -Jakob
> [1] https://iceberg.incubator.apache.org/community/
> [2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-iceberg/pull/724
>
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 10:38 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Github updates are sent to issues@iceberg.apache.org. Sorry for the
> confusion. The background is that the notifications originally went to the
> dev list, but the traffic was annoyingly high because it included not just
> issue or PR creation, but also every individual comment. A few people let
> us know that they were going to unsubscribe, so we created the issues list
> for people that wanted to keep up that way. Here's what we reported about
> it in our January 2019 board report:
> >
> > > Gitbox traffic is now going to issues@. The community was losing dev@
> subscribers because of the high volume of traffic from Gitbox. However, now
> all updates are sent to issues@. It would be nice to have emails from
> creation go to dev@, while updates and resolutions would go the issues@.
> >
> > There is still a lot of traffic going to issues@, but you can use mail
> filters to select what you'd like to see.
> >
> > I think it's generally okay that most discussion happens on pull
> requests. I think that's a common pattern across communities for small
> discussions, while larger discussions tend to happen on the dev list, like
> the Iceberg community discussions about row-level deletes. Right now, we
> have been primarily focusing on working on the things that we've already
> discussed, like getting the vectorization code committed to master.
> >
> > rb
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:21 AM Anton Okolnychyi
> <ao...@apple.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> I also think it’s a good idea to have an email thread dedicated to
> reviews/issues.
> >>
> >> - Anton
> >>
> >> > On 6 Jan 2020, at 17:06, Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I also joined the dev@ list to keep abreast of what's going on in
> >> > Iceberg. If all of the development activity is happening on GitHub
> >> > issues and pull requests, then it seems like all of this activity
> >> > should be mirrored to _some_ mailing list, for example
> >> > github@iceberg.a.o. This creates a searchable archive of the
> project's
> >> > history which seems like the goal of the ASF's email list policy.
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jim Apple <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> The Impala community is similar, with 50x more code review emails
> than dev@. Every review and patchset (in Gerrit lingo) produces a new
> email to reviews@.
> >> >>
> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@impala.apache.org
> >> >>
> >> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?reviews@impala.apache.org
> >> >>
> >> >> From my personal point of view, it’s possible that Impala should
> have more design discussions on dev@, but given the volume of code
> reviews and absent a deep culture and history of distinguishing between
> what should just be in a code review and what needs to be in a dev@
> design discussion, things seems to be in balance.
> >> >>
> >> >> On my soapbox a bit, Gerrit seems to be a much more capable tool
> that Github’s code review offerings. As a result, my opinion about the
> balance of where discussions happen is colored by my love for Gerrit, as a
> user.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@dremio.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved
> in. This is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other
> than the random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on
> Github (?) but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations
> against the dev list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we
> had email counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs
> closed/month number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on
> the dev list.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> What do other people think about this?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Hi everyone,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you
> have anything to add, please reply!
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> rb
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --------------------
> >> >>>> ## Iceberg
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before
> graduating:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>  1. Grow the Iceberg community
> >> >>>>  2. Add more committers and PPMC members
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be
> aware of?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> No issues.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### How has the community developed since the last report?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were
> merged for an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the
> previous monthly average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this
> contribution rate is still very active and healthy. Contributions are
> coming from a regular group of contributors outside of the initial set of
> committers, which is a positive indication for adding new committers and
> PPMC members over the next few months.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg,
> 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and
> included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active
> with community members testing out the release and reporting problems.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### How has the project developed since the last report?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>  - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0
> release
> >> >>>>  - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged into
> master
> >> >>>>  - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed
> >> >>>>  - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read
> path is near commit
> >> >>>>  - Flaky tests have been fixed
> >> >>>>  - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied
> to all modules
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity?
> >> >>>> Please feel free to add your own commentary.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>  - [ ] Initial setup
> >> >>>>  - [ ] Working towards first release
> >> >>>>  - [x] Community building
> >> >>>>  - [x] Nearing graduation
> >> >>>>  - [ ] Other:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### Date of last release:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>  - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>  - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote.
> Thanks to our mentors for being active!
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any
> issues.
> >> >>>> The project name has been approved.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> ### Signed-off-by:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>  - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue
> >> >>>>     Comments:
> >> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem
> >> >>>>     Comments:
> >> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley
> >> >>>>     Comments:
> >> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor
> >> >>>>     Comments:
> >> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach
> >> >>>>     Comments:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> --
> >> >>>> Ryan Blue
> >> >>>> Software Engineer
> >> >>>> Netflix
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ryan Blue
> > Software Engineer
> > Netflix
>


-- 
Ryan Blue
Software Engineer
Netflix

Re: random comment

[Jakob Homan <jg...@gmail.com>]

The website only lists the dev@, commits@ and private@ lists[1].  I've
opened a PR[2] to add the issues@ list to make it more visible to new
members of the community.

-Jakob
[1] https://iceberg.incubator.apache.org/community/
[2] https://github.com/apache/incubator-iceberg/pull/724

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 10:38 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> Github updates are sent to issues@iceberg.apache.org. Sorry for the confusion. The background is that the notifications originally went to the dev list, but the traffic was annoyingly high because it included not just issue or PR creation, but also every individual comment. A few people let us know that they were going to unsubscribe, so we created the issues list for people that wanted to keep up that way. Here's what we reported about it in our January 2019 board report:
>
> > Gitbox traffic is now going to issues@. The community was losing dev@ subscribers because of the high volume of traffic from Gitbox. However, now all updates are sent to issues@. It would be nice to have emails from creation go to dev@, while updates and resolutions would go the issues@.
>
> There is still a lot of traffic going to issues@, but you can use mail filters to select what you'd like to see.
>
> I think it's generally okay that most discussion happens on pull requests. I think that's a common pattern across communities for small discussions, while larger discussions tend to happen on the dev list, like the Iceberg community discussions about row-level deletes. Right now, we have been primarily focusing on working on the things that we've already discussed, like getting the vectorization code committed to master.
>
> rb
>
> On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:21 AM Anton Okolnychyi <ao...@apple.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> I also think it’s a good idea to have an email thread dedicated to reviews/issues.
>>
>> - Anton
>>
>> > On 6 Jan 2020, at 17:06, Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I also joined the dev@ list to keep abreast of what's going on in
>> > Iceberg. If all of the development activity is happening on GitHub
>> > issues and pull requests, then it seems like all of this activity
>> > should be mirrored to _some_ mailing list, for example
>> > github@iceberg.a.o. This creates a searchable archive of the project's
>> > history which seems like the goal of the ASF's email list policy.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jim Apple <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The Impala community is similar, with 50x more code review emails than dev@. Every review and patchset (in Gerrit lingo) produces a new email to reviews@.
>> >>
>> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@impala.apache.org
>> >>
>> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?reviews@impala.apache.org
>> >>
>> >> From my personal point of view, it’s possible that Impala should have more design discussions on dev@, but given the volume of code reviews and absent a deep culture and history of distinguishing between what should just be in a code review and what needs to be in a dev@ design discussion, things seems to be in balance.
>> >>
>> >> On my soapbox a bit, Gerrit seems to be a much more capable tool that Github’s code review offerings. As a result, my opinion about the balance of where discussions happen is colored by my love for Gerrit, as a user.
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@dremio.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved in. This is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation.
>> >>>
>> >>> It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other than the random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on Github (?) but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations against the dev list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we had email counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs closed/month number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on the dev list.
>> >>>
>> >>> What do other people think about this?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hi everyone,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you have anything to add, please reply!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> rb
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --------------------
>> >>>> ## Iceberg
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before graduating:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  1. Grow the Iceberg community
>> >>>>  2. Add more committers and PPMC members
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware of?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> No issues.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### How has the community developed since the last report?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were merged for an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the previous monthly average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this contribution rate is still very active and healthy. Contributions are coming from a regular group of contributors outside of the initial set of committers, which is a positive indication for adding new committers and PPMC members over the next few months.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg, 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active with community members testing out the release and reporting problems.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### How has the project developed since the last report?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0 release
>> >>>>  - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged into master
>> >>>>  - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed
>> >>>>  - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read path is near commit
>> >>>>  - Flaky tests have been fixed
>> >>>>  - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied to all modules
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity?
>> >>>> Please feel free to add your own commentary.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  - [ ] Initial setup
>> >>>>  - [ ] Working towards first release
>> >>>>  - [x] Community building
>> >>>>  - [x] Nearing graduation
>> >>>>  - [ ] Other:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### Date of last release:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote. Thanks to our mentors for being active!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any issues.
>> >>>> The project name has been approved.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ### Signed-off-by:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue
>> >>>>     Comments:
>> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem
>> >>>>     Comments:
>> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley
>> >>>>     Comments:
>> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor
>> >>>>     Comments:
>> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach
>> >>>>     Comments:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Ryan Blue
>> >>>> Software Engineer
>> >>>> Netflix
>>
>
>
> --
> Ryan Blue
> Software Engineer
> Netflix

Re: random comment

[Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.INVALID>]

Hi everyone,

Github updates are sent to issues@iceberg.apache.org. Sorry for the
confusion. The background is that the notifications originally went to the
dev list, but the traffic was annoyingly high because it included not just
issue or PR creation, but also every individual comment. A few people let
us know that they were going to unsubscribe, so we created the issues list
for people that wanted to keep up that way. Here's what we reported about
it in our January 2019 board report:

> Gitbox traffic is now going to issues@. The community was losing dev@
subscribers because of the high volume of traffic from Gitbox. However, now
all updates are sent to issues@. It would be nice to have emails from
creation go to dev@, while updates and resolutions would go the issues@.

There is still a lot of traffic going to issues@, but you can use mail
filters to select what you'd like to see.

I think it's generally okay that most discussion happens on pull requests.
I think that's a common pattern across communities for small discussions,
while larger discussions tend to happen on the dev list, like the Iceberg
community discussions about row-level deletes. Right now, we have been
primarily focusing on working on the things that we've already discussed,
like getting the vectorization code committed to master.

rb

On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:21 AM Anton Okolnychyi
<ao...@apple.com.invalid> wrote:

> I also think it’s a good idea to have an email thread dedicated to
> reviews/issues.
>
> - Anton
>
> > On 6 Jan 2020, at 17:06, Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I also joined the dev@ list to keep abreast of what's going on in
> > Iceberg. If all of the development activity is happening on GitHub
> > issues and pull requests, then it seems like all of this activity
> > should be mirrored to _some_ mailing list, for example
> > github@iceberg.a.o. This creates a searchable archive of the project's
> > history which seems like the goal of the ASF's email list policy.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jim Apple <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> The Impala community is similar, with 50x more code review emails than
> dev@. Every review and patchset (in Gerrit lingo) produces a new email to
> reviews@.
> >>
> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@impala.apache.org
> >>
> >> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?reviews@impala.apache.org
> >>
> >> From my personal point of view, it’s possible that Impala should have
> more design discussions on dev@, but given the volume of code reviews and
> absent a deep culture and history of distinguishing between what should
> just be in a code review and what needs to be in a dev@ design
> discussion, things seems to be in balance.
> >>
> >> On my soapbox a bit, Gerrit seems to be a much more capable tool that
> Github’s code review offerings. As a result, my opinion about the balance
> of where discussions happen is colored by my love for Gerrit, as a user.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@dremio.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved in.
> This is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation.
> >>>
> >>> It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other
> than the random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on
> Github (?) but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations
> against the dev list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we
> had email counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs
> closed/month number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on
> the dev list.
> >>>
> >>> What do other people think about this?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi everyone,
> >>>>
> >>>> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you have
> anything to add, please reply!
> >>>>
> >>>> rb
> >>>>
> >>>> --------------------
> >>>> ## Iceberg
> >>>>
> >>>> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data.
> >>>>
> >>>> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16.
> >>>>
> >>>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before
> graduating:
> >>>>
> >>>>  1. Grow the Iceberg community
> >>>>  2. Add more committers and PPMC members
> >>>>
> >>>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware
> of?
> >>>>
> >>>> No issues.
> >>>>
> >>>> ### How has the community developed since the last report?
> >>>>
> >>>> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were merged
> for an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the previous
> monthly average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this
> contribution rate is still very active and healthy. Contributions are
> coming from a regular group of contributors outside of the initial set of
> committers, which is a positive indication for adding new committers and
> PPMC members over the next few months.
> >>>>
> >>>> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg,
> 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and
> included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active
> with community members testing out the release and reporting problems.
> >>>>
> >>>> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September.
> >>>>
> >>>> ### How has the project developed since the last report?
> >>>>
> >>>>  - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0
> release
> >>>>  - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged into
> master
> >>>>  - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed
> >>>>  - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read path
> is near commit
> >>>>  - Flaky tests have been fixed
> >>>>  - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied to
> all modules
> >>>>
> >>>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity?
> >>>> Please feel free to add your own commentary.
> >>>>
> >>>>  - [ ] Initial setup
> >>>>  - [ ] Working towards first release
> >>>>  - [x] Community building
> >>>>  - [x] Nearing graduation
> >>>>  - [ ] Other:
> >>>>
> >>>> ### Date of last release:
> >>>>
> >>>>  - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019
> >>>>
> >>>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?
> >>>>
> >>>>  - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019
> >>>>
> >>>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive?
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote. Thanks
> to our mentors for being active!
> >>>>
> >>>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks?
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any issues.
> >>>> The project name has been approved.
> >>>>
> >>>> ### Signed-off-by:
> >>>>
> >>>>  - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue
> >>>>     Comments:
> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem
> >>>>     Comments:
> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley
> >>>>     Comments:
> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor
> >>>>     Comments:
> >>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach
> >>>>     Comments:
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Ryan Blue
> >>>> Software Engineer
> >>>> Netflix
>
>

-- 
Ryan Blue
Software Engineer
Netflix

Re: random comment

[Anton Okolnychyi <ao...@apple.com.INVALID>]

I also think it’s a good idea to have an email thread dedicated to reviews/issues.

- Anton

> On 6 Jan 2020, at 17:06, Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I also joined the dev@ list to keep abreast of what's going on in
> Iceberg. If all of the development activity is happening on GitHub
> issues and pull requests, then it seems like all of this activity
> should be mirrored to _some_ mailing list, for example
> github@iceberg.a.o. This creates a searchable archive of the project's
> history which seems like the goal of the ASF's email list policy.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jim Apple <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>> The Impala community is similar, with 50x more code review emails than dev@. Every review and patchset (in Gerrit lingo) produces a new email to reviews@.
>> 
>> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@impala.apache.org
>> 
>> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?reviews@impala.apache.org
>> 
>> From my personal point of view, it’s possible that Impala should have more design discussions on dev@, but given the volume of code reviews and absent a deep culture and history of distinguishing between what should just be in a code review and what needs to be in a dev@ design discussion, things seems to be in balance.
>> 
>> On my soapbox a bit, Gerrit seems to be a much more capable tool that Github’s code review offerings. As a result, my opinion about the balance of where discussions happen is colored by my love for Gerrit, as a user.
>> 
>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@dremio.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved in. This is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation.
>>> 
>>> It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other than the random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on Github (?) but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations against the dev list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we had email counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs closed/month number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on the dev list.
>>> 
>>> What do other people think about this?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>> 
>>>> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you have anything to add, please reply!
>>>> 
>>>> rb
>>>> 
>>>> --------------------
>>>> ## Iceberg
>>>> 
>>>> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data.
>>>> 
>>>> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16.
>>>> 
>>>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before graduating:
>>>> 
>>>>  1. Grow the Iceberg community
>>>>  2. Add more committers and PPMC members
>>>> 
>>>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware of?
>>>> 
>>>> No issues.
>>>> 
>>>> ### How has the community developed since the last report?
>>>> 
>>>> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were merged for an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the previous monthly average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this contribution rate is still very active and healthy. Contributions are coming from a regular group of contributors outside of the initial set of committers, which is a positive indication for adding new committers and PPMC members over the next few months.
>>>> 
>>>> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg, 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active with community members testing out the release and reporting problems.
>>>> 
>>>> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September.
>>>> 
>>>> ### How has the project developed since the last report?
>>>> 
>>>>  - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0 release
>>>>  - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged into master
>>>>  - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed
>>>>  - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read path is near commit
>>>>  - Flaky tests have been fixed
>>>>  - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied to all modules
>>>> 
>>>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity?
>>>> Please feel free to add your own commentary.
>>>> 
>>>>  - [ ] Initial setup
>>>>  - [ ] Working towards first release
>>>>  - [x] Community building
>>>>  - [x] Nearing graduation
>>>>  - [ ] Other:
>>>> 
>>>> ### Date of last release:
>>>> 
>>>>  - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019
>>>> 
>>>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?
>>>> 
>>>>  - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019
>>>> 
>>>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive?
>>>> 
>>>> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote. Thanks to our mentors for being active!
>>>> 
>>>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks?
>>>> 
>>>> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any issues.
>>>> The project name has been approved.
>>>> 
>>>> ### Signed-off-by:
>>>> 
>>>>  - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue
>>>>     Comments:
>>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem
>>>>     Comments:
>>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley
>>>>     Comments:
>>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor
>>>>     Comments:
>>>>  - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach
>>>>     Comments:
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Ryan Blue
>>>> Software Engineer
>>>> Netflix

Re: random comment

[Wes McKinney <we...@gmail.com>]

I also joined the dev@ list to keep abreast of what's going on in
Iceberg. If all of the development activity is happening on GitHub
issues and pull requests, then it seems like all of this activity
should be mirrored to _some_ mailing list, for example
github@iceberg.a.o. This creates a searchable archive of the project's
history which seems like the goal of the ASF's email list policy.

On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jim Apple <jb...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> The Impala community is similar, with 50x more code review emails than dev@. Every review and patchset (in Gerrit lingo) produces a new email to reviews@.
>
> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@impala.apache.org
>
> https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?reviews@impala.apache.org
>
> From my personal point of view, it’s possible that Impala should have more design discussions on dev@, but given the volume of code reviews and absent a deep culture and history of distinguishing between what should just be in a code review and what needs to be in a dev@ design discussion, things seems to be in balance.
>
> On my soapbox a bit, Gerrit seems to be a much more capable tool that Github’s code review offerings. As a result, my opinion about the balance of where discussions happen is colored by my love for Gerrit, as a user.
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@dremio.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved in. This is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation.
>>
>> It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other than the random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on Github (?) but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations against the dev list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we had email counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs closed/month number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on the dev list.
>>
>> What do other people think about this?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you have anything to add, please reply!
>>>
>>> rb
>>>
>>> --------------------
>>> ## Iceberg
>>>
>>> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data.
>>>
>>> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16.
>>>
>>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before graduating:
>>>
>>>   1. Grow the Iceberg community
>>>   2. Add more committers and PPMC members
>>>
>>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware of?
>>>
>>> No issues.
>>>
>>> ### How has the community developed since the last report?
>>>
>>> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were merged for an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the previous monthly average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this contribution rate is still very active and healthy. Contributions are coming from a regular group of contributors outside of the initial set of committers, which is a positive indication for adding new committers and PPMC members over the next few months.
>>>
>>> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg, 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active with community members testing out the release and reporting problems.
>>>
>>> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September.
>>>
>>> ### How has the project developed since the last report?
>>>
>>>   - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0 release
>>>   - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged into master
>>>   - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed
>>>   - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read path is near commit
>>>   - Flaky tests have been fixed
>>>   - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied to all modules
>>>
>>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity?
>>> Please feel free to add your own commentary.
>>>
>>>   - [ ] Initial setup
>>>   - [ ] Working towards first release
>>>   - [x] Community building
>>>   - [x] Nearing graduation
>>>   - [ ] Other:
>>>
>>> ### Date of last release:
>>>
>>>   - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019
>>>
>>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?
>>>
>>>   - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019
>>>
>>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive?
>>>
>>> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote. Thanks to our mentors for being active!
>>>
>>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks?
>>>
>>> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any issues.
>>> The project name has been approved.
>>>
>>> ### Signed-off-by:
>>>
>>>   - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue
>>>      Comments:
>>>   - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem
>>>      Comments:
>>>   - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley
>>>      Comments:
>>>   - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor
>>>      Comments:
>>>   - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach
>>>      Comments:
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ryan Blue
>>> Software Engineer
>>> Netflix

Fwd: random comment

[Jim Apple <jb...@apache.org>]

The Impala community is similar, with 50x more code review emails than dev@.
Every review and patchset (in Gerrit lingo) produces a new email to reviews@
.

https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?dev@impala.apache.org

https://lists.apache.org/trends.html?reviews@impala.apache.org

From my personal point of view, it’s possible that Impala should have more
design discussions on dev@, but given the volume of code reviews and absent
a deep culture and history of distinguishing between what should just be in
a code review and what needs to be in a dev@ design discussion, things
seems to be in balance.

On my soapbox a bit, Gerrit seems to be a much more capable tool that
Github’s code review offerings. As a result, my opinion about the balance
of where discussions happen is colored by my love for Gerrit, as a user.

On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Jacques Nadeau <ja...@dremio.com> wrote:

> I have a random comment on this project versus others I'm involved in.
> This is not meant to be critical, it's just an observation.
>
> It feels like very little discussion happens on the dev list other than
> the random technical support email. Basically, all interaction is on Github
> (?) but there are no notifications of Github ticket creations against the
> dev list. If you look at the dev list, the last three months we had email
> counts of Oct: 109, Nov: 35, Dec: 15. When I saw the ~35 prs closed/month
> number in the report I was shocked given the lack of email on the dev list.
>
> What do other people think about this?
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 10:28 AM Ryan Blue <rb...@netflix.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I've posted the initial draft of our report to the IPMC. If you have
>> anything to add, please reply!
>>
>> rb
>>
>> --------------------
>> ## Iceberg
>>
>> Iceberg is a table format for large, slow-moving tabular data.
>>
>> Iceberg has been incubating since 2018-11-16.
>>
>> ### Three most important unfinished issues to address before graduating:
>>
>>   1. Grow the Iceberg community
>>   2. Add more committers and PPMC members
>>
>> ### Are there any issues that the IPMC or ASF Board need to be aware of?
>>
>> No issues.
>>
>> ### How has the community developed since the last report?
>>
>> In the 4 months since the last report, 138 pull requests were merged for
>> an average of 34.5 per month. While this is down from the previous monthly
>> average of 49.6 per month for June through August, this contribution rate
>> is still very active and healthy. Contributions are coming from a regular
>> group of contributors outside of the initial set of committers, which is a
>> positive indication for adding new committers and PPMC members over the
>> next few months.
>>
>> The community released the first version of Apache Iceberg,
>> 0.7.0-incubating. This release used the "standard" incubator disclaimer and
>> included convenience binaries. The release candidate votes were very active
>> with community members testing out the release and reporting problems.
>>
>> There was an Apache Iceberg talk at ApacheCon NA in September.
>>
>> ### How has the project developed since the last report?
>>
>>   - The community is building support for the upcoming Spark 3.0 release
>>   - The first PR from the vectorization branch has been merged into master
>>   - Support for IN and NOT IN predicates was contributed
>>   - Python added support for Hive metastore tables and the read path is
>> near commit
>>   - Flaky tests have been fixed
>>   - Baseline checks (style, errorprone, findbugs) are now applied to all
>> modules
>>
>> ### How would you assess the podling's maturity?
>> Please feel free to add your own commentary.
>>
>>   - [ ] Initial setup
>>   - [ ] Working towards first release
>>   - [x] Community building
>>   - [x] Nearing graduation
>>   - [ ] Other:
>>
>> ### Date of last release:
>>
>>   - 0.7.0-incubating was released 25 October 2019
>>
>> ### When were the last committers or PPMC members elected?
>>
>>   - Anton Okolnychyi was added 30 August 2019
>>
>> ### Have your mentors been helpful and responsive?
>>
>> Yes. 4 of 5 mentors voted on the 0.7.0-incubating IPMC vote. Thanks to
>> our mentors for being active!
>>
>> ### Is the PPMC managing the podling's brand / trademarks?
>>
>> Yes, the podling is managing the brand and is not aware of any issues.
>> The project name has been approved.
>>
>> ### Signed-off-by:
>>
>>   - [x] (iceberg) Ryan Blue
>>      Comments:
>>   - [ ] (iceberg) Julien Le Dem
>>      Comments:
>>   - [ ] (iceberg) Owen O'Malley
>>      Comments:
>>   - [ ] (iceberg) James Taylor
>>      Comments:
>>   - [ ] (iceberg) Carl Steinbach
>>      Comments:
>>
>> --
>> Ryan Blue
>> Software Engineer
>> Netflix
>>
>