You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@openaz.apache.org by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org> on 2016/04/17 17:40:10 UTC

[VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

All,

This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is the
second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to the
IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies with
the Incubator.

Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes here and
on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as described
at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).

This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.

Thanks,

John

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by Dirk Koehler <di...@lookout.com.INVALID>.

I’d be also interested in moving things forward - it’s been an interesting project to work with and I feel dropping the ball would be a shame.

my 2 cents.

> On Apr 19, 2016, at 1:45 PM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help it.
> But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
> 
> Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to make
> things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> +1
>> On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> Hadrian
>>> 
>>> On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
>>> 
>>>> All,
>>>> 
>>>> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is the
>>>> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to the
>>>> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies
>> with
>>>> the Incubator.
>>>> 
>>>> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes here
>> and
>>>> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
>> described
>>>> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
>>>> 
>>>> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> John
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

Sounds great.  Let's make that happen. :-)

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Le 20/04/16 17:21, David Ash a écrit :
> > Pam, this was your baby from the beginning.  There's no one more
> qualified
> > to be involved!  I think we just need to add more committers.  I also
> > noticed your email was never answered.  Hopefully this thread will put
> some
> > light on the issue and get it resolved!
> >
> > Now I do think if you're going to have time constraints, it's important
> to
> > not to block other activities.  So I'd like you to consider at least
> > submitting one or more delegates for any mission critical roles you may
> > have with the project.
> >
> > Also, who produces the reports they want?  Do we need to come up with a
> > report to get current with project management folks?
>
> I would strongly suggest that Pam (and any other of the initial
> committers) vote in the list of people who actually proposed themselves
> as committers. This is clearly the first step forward.
>
> The next step would be to decide who would be the PPMC : this is the
> person responsible for producing the report to the Incubator PMC.
>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.

Le 20/04/16 17:21, David Ash a écrit :
> Pam, this was your baby from the beginning.  There's no one more qualified
> to be involved!  I think we just need to add more committers.  I also
> noticed your email was never answered.  Hopefully this thread will put some
> light on the issue and get it resolved!
>
> Now I do think if you're going to have time constraints, it's important to
> not to block other activities.  So I'd like you to consider at least
> submitting one or more delegates for any mission critical roles you may
> have with the project.
>
> Also, who produces the reports they want?  Do we need to come up with a
> report to get current with project management folks?

I would strongly suggest that Pam (and any other of the initial
committers) vote in the list of people who actually proposed themselves
as committers. This is clearly the first step forward.

The next step would be to decide who would be the PPMC : this is the
person responsible for producing the report to the Incubator PMC.

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

Pam, this was your baby from the beginning.  There's no one more qualified
to be involved!  I think we just need to add more committers.  I also
noticed your email was never answered.  Hopefully this thread will put some
light on the issue and get it resolved!

Now I do think if you're going to have time constraints, it's important to
not to block other activities.  So I'd like you to consider at least
submitting one or more delegates for any mission critical roles you may
have with the project.

Also, who produces the reports they want?  Do we need to come up with a
report to get current with project management folks?

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 9:09 AM, DRAGOSH, PAMELA L (PAM) <
pdragosh@research.att.com> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I¹m willing to continue working on the project as a committer. I know the
> source code and can handle the Jira management and contribute website
> content. Would love to have more committers on it to help out.
>
> I posted a couple of question/issues on 3/17/16 that no one responded to.
> I expected at least something from a mentor to help guide me on
> determining why 3rd fork pull isn¹t being reflected on the mirror. The
> other open issues I would think other folks should speak up and give their
> opinion on so we can move toward a release.
>
> So I¹m not sure if this is really going to happen. But if it does great.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pam
>
> On 4/20/16, 4:51 AM, "Colm O hEigeartaigh" <co...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >I've also made quite a few commits to OpenAz, even though I'm a mentor, so
> >not sure if I should be counted as a committer or not ;-)
> >
> >Rebooting the PMC could work, but I think we need at least 4 or 5 people
> >willing to state that they will be actively working on the project. It
> >would be helpful as well if they could state what it is they would
> >actually
> >work on.
> >
> >Colm.
> >
> >On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:06 AM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Okay. Let's do that. We just need Pam to sign off, right?
> >>
> >> And is anyone else following this chain willing to be a committer? I
> >>have a
> >> few more interested people myself, but I'd like to know what I'm working
> >> with.
> >> On Apr 19, 2016 6:16 PM, "Emmanuel Lécharny" <el...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> > Le 20/04/16 01:23, John D. Ament a écrit :
> >> > > Hi David,
> >> > >
> >> > > Quite a long list of emails you've sent.  Not saying its a bad
> >>thing,
> >> but
> >> > > just getting caught up on them.
> >> > >
> >> > > So, looking at OpenAz's proposal, you're not listed as an initial
> >> > > committer.  You would have needed to be invited as a committer on
> >>the
> >> > > project.
> >> > >
> >> > > At this point, the existing PPMC seems to have disbanded.  There
> >>would
> >> be
> >> > > nothing stopping someone from forking on github and creating a
> >>separate
> >> > > project to continue on OpenAz, but as a different name.
> >> >
> >> > I would suggest another - and simpler - path :
> >> > - gather a few volunteers, and take over the project.
> >> >
> >> > I was expecting that the initial podling members would take care of
> >> > that, but beside Pam, there is *no* activity from the list of initial
> >> > committers :
> >> >
> >> > # Rich Levinson
> >> > # Hal Lockhart
> >> > # Prateek Mishra
> >> > # David Laurance
> >> > # Duanhua Tu
> >> > # Ajith Nair
> >> > # Srijith Nair
> >> > # Chris Rath
> >> >
> >> > So here, I would suggest to reboot this list of committers. That would
> >> > require the agreement of the podling PMC, of course. The best person
> >>to
> >> > get that done would obviously be Pam.
> >> >
> >> > Note that it would require a massive effort to get the project
> >>survive,
> >> > by agregating some new committers : you need to be at least 3, but
> >>that
> >> > would be the bare minimum. Expecting to get out of incubation with
> >>only
> >> > 3 *active* committers is more than optimistic...
> >> >
> >> > Keep in mind that The ASF is all about building a community, that
> >>would
> >> > guarantee that the project will survive the natural leave of some
> >> > committers in the ling run. If a project can't gather enough
> >>committers,
> >> > then the ASF is simply not the right place for it.
> >> >
> >> > If this can't work, then, yes, forking is probably the solution.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Colm O hEigeartaigh
> >
> >Talend Community Coder
> >http://coders.talend.com
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by "DRAGOSH, PAMELA L (PAM)" <pd...@research.att.com>.

Folks,

I¹m willing to continue working on the project as a committer. I know the
source code and can handle the Jira management and contribute website
content. Would love to have more committers on it to help out.

I posted a couple of question/issues on 3/17/16 that no one responded to.
I expected at least something from a mentor to help guide me on
determining why 3rd fork pull isn¹t being reflected on the mirror. The
other open issues I would think other folks should speak up and give their
opinion on so we can move toward a release.

So I¹m not sure if this is really going to happen. But if it does great.

Thanks,

Pam

On 4/20/16, 4:51 AM, "Colm O hEigeartaigh" <co...@apache.org> wrote:

>I've also made quite a few commits to OpenAz, even though I'm a mentor, so
>not sure if I should be counted as a committer or not ;-)
>
>Rebooting the PMC could work, but I think we need at least 4 or 5 people
>willing to state that they will be actively working on the project. It
>would be helpful as well if they could state what it is they would
>actually
>work on.
>
>Colm.
>
>On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:06 AM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Okay. Let's do that. We just need Pam to sign off, right?
>>
>> And is anyone else following this chain willing to be a committer? I
>>have a
>> few more interested people myself, but I'd like to know what I'm working
>> with.
>> On Apr 19, 2016 6:16 PM, "Emmanuel Lécharny" <el...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>> > Le 20/04/16 01:23, John D. Ament a écrit :
>> > > Hi David,
>> > >
>> > > Quite a long list of emails you've sent.  Not saying its a bad
>>thing,
>> but
>> > > just getting caught up on them.
>> > >
>> > > So, looking at OpenAz's proposal, you're not listed as an initial
>> > > committer.  You would have needed to be invited as a committer on
>>the
>> > > project.
>> > >
>> > > At this point, the existing PPMC seems to have disbanded.  There
>>would
>> be
>> > > nothing stopping someone from forking on github and creating a
>>separate
>> > > project to continue on OpenAz, but as a different name.
>> >
>> > I would suggest another - and simpler - path :
>> > - gather a few volunteers, and take over the project.
>> >
>> > I was expecting that the initial podling members would take care of
>> > that, but beside Pam, there is *no* activity from the list of initial
>> > committers :
>> >
>> > # Rich Levinson
>> > # Hal Lockhart
>> > # Prateek Mishra
>> > # David Laurance
>> > # Duanhua Tu
>> > # Ajith Nair
>> > # Srijith Nair
>> > # Chris Rath
>> >
>> > So here, I would suggest to reboot this list of committers. That would
>> > require the agreement of the podling PMC, of course. The best person
>>to
>> > get that done would obviously be Pam.
>> >
>> > Note that it would require a massive effort to get the project
>>survive,
>> > by agregating some new committers : you need to be at least 3, but
>>that
>> > would be the bare minimum. Expecting to get out of incubation with
>>only
>> > 3 *active* committers is more than optimistic...
>> >
>> > Keep in mind that The ASF is all about building a community, that
>>would
>> > guarantee that the project will survive the natural leave of some
>> > committers in the ling run. If a project can't gather enough
>>committers,
>> > then the ASF is simply not the right place for it.
>> >
>> > If this can't work, then, yes, forking is probably the solution.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Colm O hEigeartaigh
>
>Talend Community Coder
>http://coders.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>.

I've also made quite a few commits to OpenAz, even though I'm a mentor, so
not sure if I should be counted as a committer or not ;-)

Rebooting the PMC could work, but I think we need at least 4 or 5 people
willing to state that they will be actively working on the project. It
would be helpful as well if they could state what it is they would actually
work on.

Colm.

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 5:06 AM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Okay. Let's do that. We just need Pam to sign off, right?
>
> And is anyone else following this chain willing to be a committer? I have a
> few more interested people myself, but I'd like to know what I'm working
> with.
> On Apr 19, 2016 6:16 PM, "Emmanuel Lécharny" <el...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Le 20/04/16 01:23, John D. Ament a écrit :
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > Quite a long list of emails you've sent.  Not saying its a bad thing,
> but
> > > just getting caught up on them.
> > >
> > > So, looking at OpenAz's proposal, you're not listed as an initial
> > > committer.  You would have needed to be invited as a committer on the
> > > project.
> > >
> > > At this point, the existing PPMC seems to have disbanded.  There would
> be
> > > nothing stopping someone from forking on github and creating a separate
> > > project to continue on OpenAz, but as a different name.
> >
> > I would suggest another - and simpler - path :
> > - gather a few volunteers, and take over the project.
> >
> > I was expecting that the initial podling members would take care of
> > that, but beside Pam, there is *no* activity from the list of initial
> > committers :
> >
> > # Rich Levinson
> > # Hal Lockhart
> > # Prateek Mishra
> > # David Laurance
> > # Duanhua Tu
> > # Ajith Nair
> > # Srijith Nair
> > # Chris Rath
> >
> > So here, I would suggest to reboot this list of committers. That would
> > require the agreement of the podling PMC, of course. The best person to
> > get that done would obviously be Pam.
> >
> > Note that it would require a massive effort to get the project survive,
> > by agregating some new committers : you need to be at least 3, but that
> > would be the bare minimum. Expecting to get out of incubation with only
> > 3 *active* committers is more than optimistic...
> >
> > Keep in mind that The ASF is all about building a community, that would
> > guarantee that the project will survive the natural leave of some
> > committers in the ling run. If a project can't gather enough committers,
> > then the ASF is simply not the right place for it.
> >
> > If this can't work, then, yes, forking is probably the solution.
> >
> >
>



-- 
Colm O hEigeartaigh

Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

Okay. Let's do that. We just need Pam to sign off, right?

And is anyone else following this chain willing to be a committer? I have a
few more interested people myself, but I'd like to know what I'm working
with.
On Apr 19, 2016 6:16 PM, "Emmanuel Lécharny" <el...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Le 20/04/16 01:23, John D. Ament a écrit :
> > Hi David,
> >
> > Quite a long list of emails you've sent.  Not saying its a bad thing, but
> > just getting caught up on them.
> >
> > So, looking at OpenAz's proposal, you're not listed as an initial
> > committer.  You would have needed to be invited as a committer on the
> > project.
> >
> > At this point, the existing PPMC seems to have disbanded.  There would be
> > nothing stopping someone from forking on github and creating a separate
> > project to continue on OpenAz, but as a different name.
>
> I would suggest another - and simpler - path :
> - gather a few volunteers, and take over the project.
>
> I was expecting that the initial podling members would take care of
> that, but beside Pam, there is *no* activity from the list of initial
> committers :
>
> # Rich Levinson
> # Hal Lockhart
> # Prateek Mishra
> # David Laurance
> # Duanhua Tu
> # Ajith Nair
> # Srijith Nair
> # Chris Rath
>
> So here, I would suggest to reboot this list of committers. That would
> require the agreement of the podling PMC, of course. The best person to
> get that done would obviously be Pam.
>
> Note that it would require a massive effort to get the project survive,
> by agregating some new committers : you need to be at least 3, but that
> would be the bare minimum. Expecting to get out of incubation with only
> 3 *active* committers is more than optimistic...
>
> Keep in mind that The ASF is all about building a community, that would
> guarantee that the project will survive the natural leave of some
> committers in the ling run. If a project can't gather enough committers,
> then the ASF is simply not the right place for it.
>
> If this can't work, then, yes, forking is probably the solution.
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.

Le 20/04/16 01:23, John D. Ament a écrit :
> Hi David,
>
> Quite a long list of emails you've sent.  Not saying its a bad thing, but
> just getting caught up on them.
>
> So, looking at OpenAz's proposal, you're not listed as an initial
> committer.  You would have needed to be invited as a committer on the
> project.
>
> At this point, the existing PPMC seems to have disbanded.  There would be
> nothing stopping someone from forking on github and creating a separate
> project to continue on OpenAz, but as a different name.

I would suggest another - and simpler - path :
- gather a few volunteers, and take over the project.

I was expecting that the initial podling members would take care of
that, but beside Pam, there is *no* activity from the list of initial
committers :

# Rich Levinson
# Hal Lockhart
# Prateek Mishra
# David Laurance
# Duanhua Tu
# Ajith Nair
# Srijith Nair
# Chris Rath

So here, I would suggest to reboot this list of committers. That would
require the agreement of the podling PMC, of course. The best person to
get that done would obviously be Pam.

Note that it would require a massive effort to get the project survive,
by agregating some new committers : you need to be at least 3, but that
would be the bare minimum. Expecting to get out of incubation with only
3 *active* committers is more than optimistic...

Keep in mind that The ASF is all about building a community, that would
guarantee that the project will survive the natural leave of some
committers in the ling run. If a project can't gather enough committers,
then the ASF is simply not the right place for it.

If this can't work, then, yes, forking is probably the solution.

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.

Hi David,

Quite a long list of emails you've sent.  Not saying its a bad thing, but
just getting caught up on them.

So, looking at OpenAz's proposal, you're not listed as an initial
committer.  You would have needed to be invited as a committer on the
project.

At this point, the existing PPMC seems to have disbanded.  There would be
nothing stopping someone from forking on github and creating a separate
project to continue on OpenAz, but as a different name.

John

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> So maybe the issue is just that the few involved contributors we have are
> new to Apache, and they were never really brought up to date on how this
> stuff actually works.  And they weren't ever made committers, so they
> really couldn't do much with their initial surge of energy, which killed
> any later energy, and it never built into anything, which resulted in no
> real recruiting.
>
> So now that I know what's up, let's give it another go?  Just make me and
> anyone else interested a committer, and give us one more month to make
> something happen.  Then kill it if turns out there's not enough energy to
> make it happen.
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:40 PM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:57 PM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Maybe my hands aren't tied. Here's what I'm looking for, maybe you can
> >> tell me I've already got what I need:
> >>
> >> 1) Username / password to a system where I can make arbitrary updates to
> >> the website.
> >>
> >
> > After looking, this just requires committer status.
> >
> >
> >> 2) Ability to grant that power to others.
> >>
> >
> > There's kind of a community approach for this, although I'm not sure what
> > our process is (officially, we should have this kind of figured out as a
> > podling, there's no set method).  So how do we decide on this?
> >
> >
> >> 3) Be able to merge pull requests to the git website.
> >>
> >
> > We can just fork it and own a new official base as far as github is
> > concerned.  Nothing needed here.
> >
> >
> >> 4) Be able to grant that power to others.
> >>
> >
> > That's a github thing.  No need to discuss it here.
> >
> >
> >> 5) Be able to pull any git updates into the official repository.
> >>
> >
> > Committer status (same as 1)
> >
> >
> >> 6) Have access to top-level management information, like URLs and access
> >> info for all Apache OpenAZ resources.
> >>
> >
> > Not sure this even exists.  But if it does, access to it would be nice.
> > Ideally, it would just be on the website we don't have yet, which would
> > publish that information to anyone that visited our site.
> >
> >
> >> 7) Be able to change that top-level management information.
> >>
> >
> >  Committer status.
> >
> >
> >
> > So I guess what I have realized is: I just need committer status.
> >
> >
> >> That would be enough as a start.
> >>
> >> We need some movement, which requires just those things for now.  Then
> >> when there's movement, I've got at least 3 more people I could bring on
> to
> >> make little tweaks (which is all we really need for a first release).
> >>
> >> I also know how to use twitter well enough to drum up more hands and
> >> feet.  But without the power to make things happen (not just commit
> code to
> >> a fork on github, but actually make those merges happen), I'm not
> getting
> >> more people involved.
> >>
> >> So, do I have this power already and don't know it, or what?
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:46 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help
> >>> it.
> >>> > But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
> >>> Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?
> >>>
> >>> ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
> >>> responsibility is keeping the project running.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to
> >>> make
> >>> > things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a
> community.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > +1
> >>> > > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > > > +1
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Hadrian
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >> All,
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote
> is
> >>> the
> >>> > > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an
> indicator
> >>> to
> >>> > the
> >>> > > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision
> >>> lies
> >>> > > with
> >>> > > >> the Incubator.
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote
> passes
> >>> here
> >>> > > and
> >>> > > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
> >>> > > described
> >>> > > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> Thanks,
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >> John
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > > >>
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

So maybe the issue is just that the few involved contributors we have are
new to Apache, and they were never really brought up to date on how this
stuff actually works.  And they weren't ever made committers, so they
really couldn't do much with their initial surge of energy, which killed
any later energy, and it never built into anything, which resulted in no
real recruiting.

So now that I know what's up, let's give it another go?  Just make me and
anyone else interested a committer, and give us one more month to make
something happen.  Then kill it if turns out there's not enough energy to
make it happen.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:40 PM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:57 PM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe my hands aren't tied. Here's what I'm looking for, maybe you can
>> tell me I've already got what I need:
>>
>> 1) Username / password to a system where I can make arbitrary updates to
>> the website.
>>
>
> After looking, this just requires committer status.
>
>
>> 2) Ability to grant that power to others.
>>
>
> There's kind of a community approach for this, although I'm not sure what
> our process is (officially, we should have this kind of figured out as a
> podling, there's no set method).  So how do we decide on this?
>
>
>> 3) Be able to merge pull requests to the git website.
>>
>
> We can just fork it and own a new official base as far as github is
> concerned.  Nothing needed here.
>
>
>> 4) Be able to grant that power to others.
>>
>
> That's a github thing.  No need to discuss it here.
>
>
>> 5) Be able to pull any git updates into the official repository.
>>
>
> Committer status (same as 1)
>
>
>> 6) Have access to top-level management information, like URLs and access
>> info for all Apache OpenAZ resources.
>>
>
> Not sure this even exists.  But if it does, access to it would be nice.
> Ideally, it would just be on the website we don't have yet, which would
> publish that information to anyone that visited our site.
>
>
>> 7) Be able to change that top-level management information.
>>
>
>  Committer status.
>
>
>
> So I guess what I have realized is: I just need committer status.
>
>
>> That would be enough as a start.
>>
>> We need some movement, which requires just those things for now.  Then
>> when there's movement, I've got at least 3 more people I could bring on to
>> make little tweaks (which is all we really need for a first release).
>>
>> I also know how to use twitter well enough to drum up more hands and
>> feet.  But without the power to make things happen (not just commit code to
>> a fork on github, but actually make those merges happen), I'm not getting
>> more people involved.
>>
>> So, do I have this power already and don't know it, or what?
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:46 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help
>>> it.
>>> > But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
>>> >
>>>
>>> I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
>>> Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?
>>>
>>> ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
>>> responsibility is keeping the project running.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to
>>> make
>>> > things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
>>> >
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a community.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > +1
>>> > > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > +1
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Hadrian
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >> All,
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is
>>> the
>>> > > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator
>>> to
>>> > the
>>> > > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision
>>> lies
>>> > > with
>>> > > >> the Incubator.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes
>>> here
>>> > > and
>>> > > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
>>> > > described
>>> > > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> Thanks,
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> John
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:57 PM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe my hands aren't tied. Here's what I'm looking for, maybe you can
> tell me I've already got what I need:
>
> 1) Username / password to a system where I can make arbitrary updates to
> the website.
>

After looking, this just requires committer status.


> 2) Ability to grant that power to others.
>

There's kind of a community approach for this, although I'm not sure what
our process is (officially, we should have this kind of figured out as a
podling, there's no set method).  So how do we decide on this?


> 3) Be able to merge pull requests to the git website.
>

We can just fork it and own a new official base as far as github is
concerned.  Nothing needed here.


> 4) Be able to grant that power to others.
>

That's a github thing.  No need to discuss it here.


> 5) Be able to pull any git updates into the official repository.
>

Committer status (same as 1)


> 6) Have access to top-level management information, like URLs and access
> info for all Apache OpenAZ resources.
>

Not sure this even exists.  But if it does, access to it would be nice.
Ideally, it would just be on the website we don't have yet, which would
publish that information to anyone that visited our site.


> 7) Be able to change that top-level management information.
>

 Committer status.



So I guess what I have realized is: I just need committer status.


> That would be enough as a start.
>
> We need some movement, which requires just those things for now.  Then
> when there's movement, I've got at least 3 more people I could bring on to
> make little tweaks (which is all we really need for a first release).
>
> I also know how to use twitter well enough to drum up more hands and
> feet.  But without the power to make things happen (not just commit code to
> a fork on github, but actually make those merges happen), I'm not getting
> more people involved.
>
> So, do I have this power already and don't know it, or what?
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:46 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help it.
>> > But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
>> >
>>
>> I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
>> Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?
>>
>> ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
>> responsibility is keeping the project running.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to make
>> > things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
>> >
>>
>> I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a community.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1
>> > > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > +1
>> > > >
>> > > > Hadrian
>> > > >
>> > > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> All,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is
>> the
>> > > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator
>> to
>> > the
>> > > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision
>> lies
>> > > with
>> > > >> the Incubator.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes
>> here
>> > > and
>> > > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
>> > > described
>> > > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
>> > > >>
>> > > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Thanks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> John
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

Maybe my hands aren't tied. Here's what I'm looking for, maybe you can tell
me I've already got what I need:

1) Username / password to a system where I can make arbitrary updates to
the website.
2) Ability to grant that power to others.
3) Be able to merge pull requests to the git website.
4) Be able to grant that power to others.
5) Be able to pull any git updates into the official repository.
6) Have access to top-level management information, like URLs and access
info for all Apache OpenAZ resources.
7) Be able to change that top-level management information.

That would be enough as a start.

We need some movement, which requires just those things for now.  Then when
there's movement, I've got at least 3 more people I could bring on to make
little tweaks (which is all we really need for a first release).

I also know how to use twitter well enough to drum up more hands and feet.
But without the power to make things happen (not just commit code to a fork
on github, but actually make those merges happen), I'm not getting more
people involved.

So, do I have this power already and don't know it, or what?

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:46 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help it.
> > But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
> >
>
> I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
> Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?
>
> ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
> responsibility is keeping the project running.
>
>
> >
> > Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to make
> > things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
> >
>
> I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a community.
>
>
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Hadrian
> > > >
> > > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> All,
> > > >>
> > > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is
> the
> > > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to
> > the
> > > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies
> > > with
> > > >> the Incubator.
> > > >>
> > > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes
> here
> > > and
> > > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
> > > described
> > > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
> > > >>
> > > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >> John
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

Also, I don't work for AT&T anymore.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:00 PM, David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'll tell you what: anyone can feel free to call me on the phone to
> actually chat about this: 1-307-267-1380.
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Yanik Grignon <yg...@salesforce.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It's entirely unclear how we can contribute to the community. I made a
>> change and submitted a pull request against the github mirror of the
>> Apache
>> git since I don't know how to connect to the Apache git. That pull request
>> has been merged by Pam into the Apache git repo.
>>
>> There are some steps needed to get enable people to contribute a project
>> and from what I have seen, not much on that front has been done here.
>> Until
>> the project is setup (which basically still has not been done), there's no
>> much "community involvement" that can happen.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Yanik Grignon
>> Product Owner & Architect
>> Salesforce
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:46 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help
>> it.
>> > > But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
>> > >
>> >
>> > I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
>> > Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?
>> >
>> > ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
>> > responsibility is keeping the project running.
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to
>> make
>> > > things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
>> > >
>> >
>> > I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a community.
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > +1
>> > > > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > +1
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Hadrian
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >> All,
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is
>> > the
>> > > > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an
>> indicator to
>> > > the
>> > > > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision
>> lies
>> > > > with
>> > > > >> the Incubator.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes
>> > here
>> > > > and
>> > > > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
>> > > > described
>> > > > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Thanks,
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> John
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

I'll tell you what: anyone can feel free to call me on the phone to
actually chat about this: 1-307-267-1380.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Yanik Grignon <yg...@salesforce.com>
wrote:

> It's entirely unclear how we can contribute to the community. I made a
> change and submitted a pull request against the github mirror of the Apache
> git since I don't know how to connect to the Apache git. That pull request
> has been merged by Pam into the Apache git repo.
>
> There are some steps needed to get enable people to contribute a project
> and from what I have seen, not much on that front has been done here. Until
> the project is setup (which basically still has not been done), there's no
> much "community involvement" that can happen.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Yanik Grignon
> Product Owner & Architect
> Salesforce
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:46 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help
> it.
> > > But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
> > >
> >
> > I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
> > Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?
> >
> > ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
> > responsibility is keeping the project running.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to
> make
> > > things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
> > >
> >
> > I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a community.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Hadrian
> > > > >
> > > > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> All,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is
> > the
> > > > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator
> to
> > > the
> > > > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision
> lies
> > > > with
> > > > >> the Incubator.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes
> > here
> > > > and
> > > > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
> > > > described
> > > > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> John
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

> There are some steps needed to get enable people to contribute a project
> and from what I have seen, not much on that front has been done here.
Until
> the project is setup (which basically still has not been done), there's no
> much "community involvement" that can happen.

Another role for "management".  Let me set up the project.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 3:55 PM, Yanik Grignon <yg...@salesforce.com>
wrote:

> It's entirely unclear how we can contribute to the community. I made a
> change and submitted a pull request against the github mirror of the Apache
> git since I don't know how to connect to the Apache git. That pull request
> has been merged by Pam into the Apache git repo.
>
> There are some steps needed to get enable people to contribute a project
> and from what I have seen, not much on that front has been done here. Until
> the project is setup (which basically still has not been done), there's no
> much "community involvement" that can happen.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Yanik Grignon
> Product Owner & Architect
> Salesforce
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:46 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help
> it.
> > > But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
> > >
> >
> > I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
> > Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?
> >
> > ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
> > responsibility is keeping the project running.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to
> make
> > > things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
> > >
> >
> > I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a community.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > Hadrian
> > > > >
> > > > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> All,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is
> > the
> > > > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator
> to
> > > the
> > > > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision
> lies
> > > > with
> > > > >> the Incubator.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes
> > here
> > > > and
> > > > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
> > > > described
> > > > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> John
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by Yanik Grignon <yg...@salesforce.com>.

It's entirely unclear how we can contribute to the community. I made a
change and submitted a pull request against the github mirror of the Apache
git since I don't know how to connect to the Apache git. That pull request
has been merged by Pam into the Apache git repo.

There are some steps needed to get enable people to contribute a project
and from what I have seen, not much on that front has been done here. Until
the project is setup (which basically still has not been done), there's no
much "community involvement" that can happen.

Thanks!

Yanik Grignon
Product Owner & Architect
Salesforce

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:46 PM, John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help it.
> > But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
> >
>
> I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
> Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?
>
> ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
> responsibility is keeping the project running.
>
>
> >
> > Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to make
> > things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
> >
>
> I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a community.
>
>
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Hadrian
> > > >
> > > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> All,
> > > >>
> > > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is
> the
> > > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to
> > the
> > > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies
> > > with
> > > >> the Incubator.
> > > >>
> > > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes
> here
> > > and
> > > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
> > > described
> > > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
> > > >>
> > > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >> John
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:45 PM David Ash <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help it.
> But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?
>

I'm a bit confused by your statements.  Who is management in this case?
Your employer? The ASF?  Why are your hands tied for trying to help?

ASF projects have no one in charge of them.  TLPs get a VP, whose main
responsibility is keeping the project running.


>
> Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to make
> things happen, and I might be able to recover it.
>

I'm not sure what recover it means.  A community of 1 isn't a community.


>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> > On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Hadrian
> > >
> > > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> > >
> > >> All,
> > >>
> > >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is the
> > >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to
> the
> > >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies
> > with
> > >> the Incubator.
> > >>
> > >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes here
> > and
> > >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
> > described
> > >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
> > >>
> > >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> John
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by David Ash <gr...@gmail.com>.

I've been ignoring this because my hands are tied for trying to help it.
But can we try moving to new management? Can I be put in charge?

Send me links to the right resources and give me the credentials to make
things happen, and I might be able to recover it.

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, 3:25 PM Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
> On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Hadrian
> >
> > On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> >
> >> All,
> >>
> >> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is the
> >> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to the
> >> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies
> with
> >> the Incubator.
> >>
> >> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes here
> and
> >> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as
> described
> >> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
> >>
> >> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >>
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by Farasath Ahamed <me...@gmail.com>.

+1
On Apr 19, 2016 2:41 AM, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> Hadrian
>
> On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is the
>> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to the
>> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies with
>> the Incubator.
>>
>> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes here and
>> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as described
>> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
>>
>> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> John
>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.

+1

Hadrian

On 04/17/2016 11:40 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> All,
>
> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is the
> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to the
> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies with
> the Incubator.
>
> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes here and
> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as described
> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling

Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.

Le 17/04/16 17:40, John D. Ament a écrit :
> All,
>
> This is a formal vote to retire the OpenAz podling.  This vote is the
> second step in the retirement process and is used as an indicator to the
> IPMC about whether to retire the podling, as the final decision lies with
> the Incubator.
>
> Unless one of the mentors wants to take it on, if the vote passes here and
> on the IPMC list, I can take care of the retirement process (as described
> at http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html ).
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
+1

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling, take 2

Posted by Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>.

+1.

Colm.

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> it's probably time to vote to retire the OpenAZ podling. Would the vote
> be positive, we would inform the IPMC by updating the podling report
> with the result.
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>
> Thanks,
> Emmanuel
>



-- 
Colm O hEigeartaigh

Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com

Result, was: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling, take 2

Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.

Hi,

I'm closing this vote with 4 +1 :
Colm,
Hadrian,
John
and me.

I will start an official vote for riterement on the Incubator mailing
list, per http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html.

Thanks !

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling, take 2

Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.

+1
Don't forget that per the retirement guide, we need to also have the vote
on the general list. -> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html

John

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 8:26 AM Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> Hadrian
>
> On 08/03/2016 03:21 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > it's probably time to vote to retire the OpenAZ podling. Would the vote
> > be positive, we would inform the IPMC by updating the podling report
> > with the result.
> >
> > This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Emmanuel
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Retire the OpenAz Podling, take 2

Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.

+1

Hadrian

On 08/03/2016 03:21 AM, Emmanuel L�charny wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it's probably time to vote to retire the OpenAZ podling. Would the vote
> be positive, we would inform the IPMC by updating the podling report
> with the result.
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours via lazy consensus.
>
> Thanks,
> Emmanuel
>