[DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
90 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Alexander Bezzubov
Dear Zeppelin developers,

now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to suggest
the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level project.

If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE thread here.

What do you guys think?

--
Alex
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

moon
Administrator
Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
Let's start a vote.

Best,
moon

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Dear Zeppelin developers,
>
> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to suggest
> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level project.
>
> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE thread
> here.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
> --
> Alex
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Amos B. Elberg
In reply to this post by Alexander Bezzubov
Alex -

I hestitate to respond at all since recently when a pmc member has
called for a "vote" it seems more that the purpose is to ratify
something that a few people have already privately agreed on.

But -- the last time Zeppelin applied for graduation was a month ago.
 What happened then?



On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 15:11 +0100, Alexander Bezzubov wrote:

> Dear Zeppelin developers,
>
> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> suggest
> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> project.
>
> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> thread here.
>
> What do you guys think?
>
> --
> Alex
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Sourav Mazumder
In reply to this post by moon
Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in different
quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to top
level.

However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication added
to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people are
eagerly waiting for.

Regards,
Sourav

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> Let's start a vote.
>
> Best,
> moon
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Dear Zeppelin developers,
> >
> > now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> suggest
> > the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level project.
> >
> > If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE thread
> > here.
> >
> > What do you guys think?
> >
> > --
> > Alex
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Eran Witkon
If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for graduation
from day one.
I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
+1 for graduation after we add both
Eran
On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in different
> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to top
> level.
>
> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication added
> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people are
> eagerly waiting for.
>
> Regards,
> Sourav
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> > Let's start a vote.
> >
> > Best,
> > moon
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Zeppelin developers,
> > >
> > > now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> > suggest
> > > the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level project.
> > >
> > > If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE thread
> > > here.
> > >
> > > What do you guys think?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Alex
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Alexander Bezzubov
In reply to this post by Amos B. Elberg
Hi Amos,

thank you for the question.

Let me recap past events to give some context - last month there was a
discussion started, it stopped for the period of releasing new version
0.5.6

Now its on again in order to make sure we have a concensus before starting
a vote process.

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 19:21 Amos Elberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Alex -
>
> I hestitate to respond at all since recently when a pmc member has
> called for a "vote" it seems more that the purpose is to ratify
> something that a few people have already privately agreed on.
>
> But -- the last time Zeppelin applied for graduation was a month ago.
>  What happened then?
>
>
>
> On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 15:11 +0100, Alexander Bezzubov wrote:
> > Dear Zeppelin developers,
> >
> > now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> > suggest
> > the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> > project.
> >
> > If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> > thread here.
> >
> > What do you guys think?
> >
> > --
> > Alex
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Alexander Bezzubov
In reply to this post by Sourav Mazumder
Hi Sourav,

thank you for your kind words and support!

From the previous discussions we came up with a concensus that Zeppelin is
moving from featre based release to time based ones with timeframe of about
3 months. Given that, its reasonable to expect next realase happen around
March and I definitly agree with you that those valuable features belong to
the next release - there is no question about that.

Question of graduation is orthogonal one and in case we can manage it now,
our next March realease, on top of the feauteres that it brings to the
users have a chance also to be a first release without incubating label,
thats it, nothing more.

Please let me know if that makes sense!

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 19:24 Sourav Mazumder <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in different
> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to top
> level.
>
> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication added
> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people are
> eagerly waiting for.
>
> Regards,
> Sourav
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> > Let's start a vote.
> >
> > Best,
> > moon
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Zeppelin developers,
> > >
> > > now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> > suggest
> > > the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level project.
> > >
> > > If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE thread
> > > here.
> > >
> > > What do you guys think?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Alex
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Alexander Bezzubov
In reply to this post by Eran Witkon
Hi Eran,

thanks for sharing your oppinion!

Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and let us
know if that makes sense to you?

By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but after
reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have pre-request
regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal procedure of
graduation.

[1]
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]> wrote:

> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for graduation
> from day one.
> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
> +1 for graduation after we add both
> Eran
> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in different
> > quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to top
> > level.
> >
> > However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication
> added
> > to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people are
> > eagerly waiting for.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Sourav
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> > > Let's start a vote.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > moon
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear Zeppelin developers,
> > > >
> > > > now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> > > suggest
> > > > the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> project.
> > > >
> > > > If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> thread
> > > > here.
> > > >
> > > > What do you guys think?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Alex
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Amos B. Elberg
No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not withdrawn in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from the mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the last public discussion about graduation until today.

Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion emails that you're referring to.

> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Eran,
>
> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
>
> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and let us
> know if that makes sense to you?
>
> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but after
> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have pre-request
> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal procedure of
> graduation.
>
> [1]
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
>
>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for graduation
>> from day one.
>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
>> +1 for graduation after we add both
>> Eran
>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in different
>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to top
>>> level.
>>>
>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication
>> added
>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people are
>>> eagerly waiting for.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Sourav
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
>>>> Let's start a vote.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> moon
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
>>>>>
>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
>>>> suggest
>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
>> project.
>>>>>
>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
>> thread
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you guys think?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Alex
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

moon
Administrator
Hi guys,

I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
graduation goal.

Including specific features could be valid concern for release discussion,
but i don't think it's related to a graduation.

Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in my
understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation vote
is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.

Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and review
process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many contributions
that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul and
Felix helped a lot)

So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to the
release / roadmap discussion.
In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
evaluating
http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
etc.

Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?

Thanks,
moon

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not withdrawn
> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from the
> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the
> last public discussion about graduation until today.
>
> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion emails
> that you're referring to.
>
> > On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Eran,
> >
> > thanks for sharing your oppinion!
> >
> > Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and let
> us
> > know if that makes sense to you?
> >
> > By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but after
> > reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have pre-request
> > regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal procedure
> of
> > graduation.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
> >
> >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
> graduation
> >> from day one.
> >> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
> >> +1 for graduation after we add both
> >> Eran
> >> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
> [hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
> different
> >>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to
> top
> >>> level.
> >>>
> >>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication
> >> added
> >>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people are
> >>> eagerly waiting for.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Sourav
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> >>>> Let's start a vote.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> moon
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> >>>> suggest
> >>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> >> project.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> >> thread
> >>>>> here.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What do you guys think?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Alex
> >>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Amos B. Elberg
I think the community should be able to decide for itself what it wants to talk about and I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to say that part of the discussion is off-limits.

> On Feb 3, 2016, at 7:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
> graduation goal.
>
> Including specific features could be valid concern for release discussion,
> but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
>
> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in my
> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation vote
> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
>
> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and review
> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many contributions
> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul and
> Felix helped a lot)
>
> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to the
> release / roadmap discussion.
> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
> evaluating
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
> etc.
>
> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
>
> Thanks,
> moon
>
>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not withdrawn
>> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from the
>> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the
>> last public discussion about graduation until today.
>>
>> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion emails
>> that you're referring to.
>>
>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Eran,
>>>
>>> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
>>>
>>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and let
>> us
>>> know if that makes sense to you?
>>>
>>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but after
>>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have pre-request
>>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal procedure
>> of
>>> graduation.
>>>
>>> [1]
>>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
>> graduation
>>>> from day one.
>>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
>>>> +1 for graduation after we add both
>>>> Eran
>>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
>> [hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
>> different
>>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to
>> top
>>>>> level.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication
>>>> added
>>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people are
>>>>> eagerly waiting for.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Sourav
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
>>>>>> Let's start a vote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>> moon
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
>>>> project.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
>>>> thread
>>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you guys think?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

moon
Administrator
I shared why i specific features are not prerequisites of graduation and
why it's off-topic. Also alternative discussion thread that can be handled.

Amos, if you think specific features are prerequisites of graduation,
please share the reason why.

Thanks,
moon

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> I think the community should be able to decide for itself what it wants to
> talk about and I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to say that part
> of the discussion is off-limits.
>
> > On Feb 3, 2016, at 7:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
> > graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
> > graduation goal.
> >
> > Including specific features could be valid concern for release
> discussion,
> > but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
> >
> > Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in my
> > understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation vote
> > is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
> >
> > Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and review
> > process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many contributions
> > that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul
> and
> > Felix helped a lot)
> >
> > So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to the
> > release / roadmap discussion.
> > In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
> > evaluating
> >
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
> > etc.
> >
> > Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > moon
> >
> >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
> withdrawn
> >> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from
> the
> >> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the
> >> last public discussion about graduation until today.
> >>
> >> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion
> emails
> >> that you're referring to.
> >>
> >>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Eran,
> >>>
> >>> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
> >>>
> >>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and
> let
> >> us
> >>> know if that makes sense to you?
> >>>
> >>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but after
> >>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
> pre-request
> >>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
> procedure
> >> of
> >>> graduation.
> >>>
> >>> [1]
> >>>
> >>
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
> >> graduation
> >>>> from day one.
> >>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
> >>>> +1 for graduation after we add both
> >>>> Eran
> >>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
> >> [hidden email]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
> >> different
> >>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to
> >> top
> >>>>> level.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication
> >>>> added
> >>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people
> are
> >>>>> eagerly waiting for.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>> Sourav
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> >>>>>> Let's start a vote.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>> moon
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]
> >
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> >>>>>> suggest
> >>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> >>>> project.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> >>>> thread
> >>>>>>> here.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What do you guys think?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Alex
> >>>>
> >>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Amos B. Elberg
Moon please don't try to turn this into a personal debate with me. Clearly, members of the community disagree with the way you see things.

> On Feb 3, 2016, at 9:45 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I shared why i specific features are not prerequisites of graduation and
> why it's off-topic. Also alternative discussion thread that can be handled.
>
> Amos, if you think specific features are prerequisites of graduation,
> please share the reason why.
>
> Thanks,
> moon
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> I think the community should be able to decide for itself what it wants to
>> talk about and I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to say that part
>> of the discussion is off-limits.
>>
>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 7:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
>>> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
>>> graduation goal.
>>>
>>> Including specific features could be valid concern for release
>> discussion,
>>> but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
>>>
>>> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in my
>>> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation vote
>>> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
>>>
>>> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and review
>>> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many contributions
>>> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul
>> and
>>> Felix helped a lot)
>>>
>>> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to the
>>> release / roadmap discussion.
>>> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
>>> evaluating
>> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> moon
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
>> withdrawn
>>>> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from
>> the
>>>> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the
>>>> last public discussion about graduation until today.
>>>>
>>>> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion
>> emails
>>>> that you're referring to.
>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Eran,
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and
>> let
>>>> us
>>>>> know if that makes sense to you?
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but after
>>>>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
>> pre-request
>>>>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
>> procedure
>>>> of
>>>>> graduation.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
>>>> graduation
>>>>>> from day one.
>>>>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
>>>>>> +1 for graduation after we add both
>>>>>> Eran
>>>>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
>>>> different
>>>>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to
>>>> top
>>>>>>> level.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication
>>>>>> added
>>>>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people
>> are
>>>>>>> eagerly waiting for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Sourav
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
>>>>>>>> Let's start a vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>> moon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]
>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
>>>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
>>>>>> thread
>>>>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Alex
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

moon
Administrator
Amos,

I'm not sure why you taking me to want turn personal debate to you.
I'm sure i don't want to have personal debate to you.

I just wanted you share you reason why you think specific features are
prerequisites. Can you share the reason why?

Thanks,
moon

On 2016년 2월 4일 (목) at 오후 12:01 Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Moon please don't try to turn this into a personal debate with me.
> Clearly, members of the community disagree with the way you see things.
>
> > On Feb 3, 2016, at 9:45 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I shared why i specific features are not prerequisites of graduation and
> > why it's off-topic. Also alternative discussion thread that can be
> handled.
> >
> > Amos, if you think specific features are prerequisites of graduation,
> > please share the reason why.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > moon
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I think the community should be able to decide for itself what it wants
> to
> >> talk about and I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to say that
> part
> >> of the discussion is off-limits.
> >>
> >>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 7:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi guys,
> >>>
> >>> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
> >>> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
> >>> graduation goal.
> >>>
> >>> Including specific features could be valid concern for release
> >> discussion,
> >>> but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
> >>>
> >>> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in
> my
> >>> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation
> vote
> >>> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
> >>>
> >>> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and
> review
> >>> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many
> contributions
> >>> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul
> >> and
> >>> Felix helped a lot)
> >>>
> >>> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to
> the
> >>> release / roadmap discussion.
> >>> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
> >>> evaluating
> >>
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
> >>> etc.
> >>>
> >>> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> moon
> >>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
> >> withdrawn
> >>>> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback
> from
> >> the
> >>>> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's
> the
> >>>> last public discussion about graduation until today.
> >>>>
> >>>> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion
> >> emails
> >>>> that you're referring to.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Eran,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and
> >> let
> >>>> us
> >>>>> know if that makes sense to you?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but
> after
> >>>>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
> >> pre-request
> >>>>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
> >> procedure
> >>>> of
> >>>>> graduation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1]
> >>
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
> >>>> graduation
> >>>>>> from day one.
> >>>>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
> >>>>>> +1 for graduation after we add both
> >>>>>> Eran
> >>>>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
> >>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
> >>>> different
> >>>>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it
> to
> >>>> top
> >>>>>>> level.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and
> Authentication
> >>>>>> added
> >>>>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people
> >> are
> >>>>>>> eagerly waiting for.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>> Sourav
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> >>>>>>>> Let's start a vote.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>> moon
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <
> [hidden email]
> >>>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like
> to
> >>>>>>>> suggest
> >>>>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> >>>>>> project.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> >>>>>> thread
> >>>>>>>>> here.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> What do you guys think?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> Alex
> >>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Amos B. Elberg
Moon I don't think that's the question. The question is why are these things still being delayed, and what happened to the last attempt to graduate. You seem very focused on me.

> On Feb 3, 2016, at 10:32 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Amos,
>
> I'm not sure why you taking me to want turn personal debate to you.
> I'm sure i don't want to have personal debate to you.
>
> I just wanted you share you reason why you think specific features are
> prerequisites. Can you share the reason why?
>
> Thanks,
> moon
>
>> On 2016년 2월 4일 (목) at 오후 12:01 Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Moon please don't try to turn this into a personal debate with me.
>> Clearly, members of the community disagree with the way you see things.
>>
>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 9:45 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I shared why i specific features are not prerequisites of graduation and
>>> why it's off-topic. Also alternative discussion thread that can be
>> handled.
>>>
>>> Amos, if you think specific features are prerequisites of graduation,
>>> please share the reason why.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> moon
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the community should be able to decide for itself what it wants
>> to
>>>> talk about and I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to say that
>> part
>>>> of the discussion is off-limits.
>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 7:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
>>>>> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
>>>>> graduation goal.
>>>>>
>>>>> Including specific features could be valid concern for release
>>>> discussion,
>>>>> but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in
>> my
>>>>> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation
>> vote
>>>>> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and
>> review
>>>>> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many
>> contributions
>>>>> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul
>>>> and
>>>>> Felix helped a lot)
>>>>>
>>>>> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to
>> the
>>>>> release / roadmap discussion.
>>>>> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
>>>>> evaluating
>> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
>>>>> etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> moon
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
>>>> withdrawn
>>>>>> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback
>> from
>>>> the
>>>>>> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's
>> the
>>>>>> last public discussion about graduation until today.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion
>>>> emails
>>>>>> that you're referring to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Eran,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and
>>>> let
>>>>>> us
>>>>>>> know if that makes sense to you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but
>> after
>>>>>>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
>>>> pre-request
>>>>>>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
>>>> procedure
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> graduation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1]
>> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
>>>>>> graduation
>>>>>>>> from day one.
>>>>>>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
>>>>>>>> +1 for graduation after we add both
>>>>>>>> Eran
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
>>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it
>> to
>>>>>> top
>>>>>>>>> level.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and
>> Authentication
>>>>>>>> added
>>>>>>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people
>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> eagerly waiting for.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> Sourav
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
>>>>>>>>>> Let's start a vote.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>> moon
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <
>> [hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like
>> to
>>>>>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
>>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
>>>>>>>> thread
>>>>>>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Alex
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

moon
Administrator
Amos, I'm not focused on you at all unless you're very beautiful women.
So, please don't worry about that.

As i already described, since last graduation discussion, community
improved/clarify contribution guide and review process and Committers are
helping long living PR to be merged. And now resuming the discussion.

That's my understanding of what happened.

Best,
moon

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 12:42 PM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Moon I don't think that's the question. The question is why are these
> things still being delayed, and what happened to the last attempt to
> graduate. You seem very focused on me.
>
> > On Feb 3, 2016, at 10:32 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Amos,
> >
> > I'm not sure why you taking me to want turn personal debate to you.
> > I'm sure i don't want to have personal debate to you.
> >
> > I just wanted you share you reason why you think specific features are
> > prerequisites. Can you share the reason why?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > moon
> >
> >> On 2016년 2월 4일 (목) at 오후 12:01 Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Moon please don't try to turn this into a personal debate with me.
> >> Clearly, members of the community disagree with the way you see things.
> >>
> >>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 9:45 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I shared why i specific features are not prerequisites of graduation
> and
> >>> why it's off-topic. Also alternative discussion thread that can be
> >> handled.
> >>>
> >>> Amos, if you think specific features are prerequisites of graduation,
> >>> please share the reason why.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> moon
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:01 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I think the community should be able to decide for itself what it
> wants
> >> to
> >>>> talk about and I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to say that
> >> part
> >>>> of the discussion is off-limits.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 7:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi guys,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
> >>>>> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
> >>>>> graduation goal.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Including specific features could be valid concern for release
> >>>> discussion,
> >>>>> but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in
> >> my
> >>>>> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation
> >> vote
> >>>>> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and
> >> review
> >>>>> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many
> >> contributions
> >>>>> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially
> Jongyoul
> >>>> and
> >>>>> Felix helped a lot)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to
> >> the
> >>>>> release / roadmap discussion.
> >>>>> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such
> as
> >>>>> evaluating
> >>
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
> >>>>> etc.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> moon
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <
> [hidden email]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
> >>>> withdrawn
> >>>>>> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback
> >> from
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's
> >> the
> >>>>>> last public discussion about graduation until today.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion
> >>>> emails
> >>>>>> that you're referring to.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Eran,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle
> and
> >>>> let
> >>>>>> us
> >>>>>>> know if that makes sense to you?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but
> >> after
> >>>>>>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
> >>>> pre-request
> >>>>>>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
> >>>> procedure
> >>>>>> of
> >>>>>>> graduation.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [1]
> >>
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
> >>>>>> graduation
> >>>>>>>> from day one.
> >>>>>>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
> >>>>>>>> +1 for graduation after we add both
> >>>>>>>> Eran
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
> >>>>>> [hidden email]>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
> >>>>>> different
> >>>>>>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it
> >> to
> >>>>>> top
> >>>>>>>>> level.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and
> >> Authentication
> >>>>>>>> added
> >>>>>>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the
> people
> >>>> are
> >>>>>>>>> eagerly waiting for.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>> Sourav
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> >>>>>>>>>> Let's start a vote.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>>>>>>> moon
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <
> >> [hidden email]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like
> >> to
> >>>>>>>>>> suggest
> >>>>>>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> >>>>>>>> project.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> >>>>>>>> thread
> >>>>>>>>>>> here.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> Alex
> >>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Sourav Mazumder
In reply to this post by moon
This does make sense Moon. Completely agree with you that features are not
important for becoming a top level project

However, in my opinion, from the practical usage standpoint, without these
two features Zeppelin does not look to me a full fledged top level project.
Curious whether there are any technical glitches which are impediment in
bringing these features to the main branch. Wondering if any help can help
to get those problems fixed.

Regards,
Sourav

On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 4:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
> graduation goal.
>
> Including specific features could be valid concern for release discussion,
> but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
>
> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in my
> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation vote
> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
>
> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and review
> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many contributions
> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul and
> Felix helped a lot)
>
> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to the
> release / roadmap discussion.
> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
> evaluating
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
> etc.
>
> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
>
> Thanks,
> moon
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
> withdrawn
> > in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from
> the
> > mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the
> > last public discussion about graduation until today.
> >
> > Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion emails
> > that you're referring to.
> >
> > > On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Eran,
> > >
> > > thanks for sharing your oppinion!
> > >
> > > Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and
> let
> > us
> > > know if that makes sense to you?
> > >
> > > By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but after
> > > reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
> pre-request
> > > regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
> procedure
> > of
> > > graduation.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
> > >
> > >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
> > graduation
> > >> from day one.
> > >> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
> > >> +1 for graduation after we add both
> > >> Eran
> > >> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
> > [hidden email]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
> > different
> > >>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it to
> > top
> > >>> level.
> > >>>
> > >>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and Authentication
> > >> added
> > >>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people
> are
> > >>> eagerly waiting for.
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards,
> > >>> Sourav
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> > >>>> Let's start a vote.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Best,
> > >>>> moon
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]
> >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like to
> > >>>> suggest
> > >>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> > >> project.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> > >> thread
> > >>>>> here.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> What do you guys think?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Alex
> > >>
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

moon
Administrator
Thanks Sourav for interest in this discussion and very valuable opinion.

I completely agree how much R and Authentication (which i believe already
in Zeppelin) will be useful for users. And believe me, I want these
features in Zeppelin more than anyone.

But at the same time we have diversity of user bases.
Some people might think supporting general JDBC is more practical and more
useful feature, the other can think multi-tenancy is the most important,
etc, etc.

So, i believe Apache Top Level project is defined by how community works,
not defined by what feature does the software includes.

Regarding bringing R into main branch, I tried to make pr208 passes the CI.
I could able to make it pass 1 test profile, but couldn't make it pass all
other test profiles.

I'm suggesting split the contribution into smaller peaces and merge one by
one. Like Hayssam did it for his contribution of Shiro security integration
(pr586). And I'm volunteering making pr208 into smaller PRs.

Best,
moon

On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:11 PM Sourav Mazumder <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> This does make sense Moon. Completely agree with you that features are not
> important for becoming a top level project
>
> However, in my opinion, from the practical usage standpoint, without these
> two features Zeppelin does not look to me a full fledged top level project.
> Curious whether there are any technical glitches which are impediment in
> bringing these features to the main branch. Wondering if any help can help
> to get those problems fixed.
>
> Regards,
> Sourav
>
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 4:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
> > graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
> > graduation goal.
> >
> > Including specific features could be valid concern for release
> discussion,
> > but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
> >
> > Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in my
> > understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation vote
> > is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
> >
> > Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and review
> > process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many contributions
> > that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul
> and
> > Felix helped a lot)
> >
> > So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to the
> > release / roadmap discussion.
> > In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
> > evaluating
> >
> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
> > etc.
> >
> > Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > moon
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
> > withdrawn
> > > in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from
> > the
> > > mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the
> > > last public discussion about graduation until today.
> > >
> > > Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion
> emails
> > > that you're referring to.
> > >
> > > > On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Eran,
> > > >
> > > > thanks for sharing your oppinion!
> > > >
> > > > Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and
> > let
> > > us
> > > > know if that makes sense to you?
> > > >
> > > > By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but
> after
> > > > reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
> > pre-request
> > > > regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
> > procedure
> > > of
> > > > graduation.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
> > > >
> > > >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
> > > graduation
> > > >> from day one.
> > > >> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
> > > >> +1 for graduation after we add both
> > > >> Eran
> > > >> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
> > > different
> > > >>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it
> to
> > > top
> > > >>> level.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and
> Authentication
> > > >> added
> > > >>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people
> > are
> > > >>> eagerly waiting for.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Regards,
> > > >>> Sourav
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
> > > >>>> Let's start a vote.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Best,
> > > >>>> moon
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like
> to
> > > >>>> suggest
> > > >>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
> > > >> project.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
> > > >> thread
> > > >>>>> here.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> What do you guys think?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> --
> > > >>>>> Alex
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Amos B. Elberg
I don't see a point to splitting it. The reason we didn't merge in December is that bugs in CI prevented the tests *in* 208 from functioning. It wasn't causing anything else to fail. Now CI is broken for the project anyway. If it was going to be split, I would do that myself.

The reliability of the code has been proven in the field: People who don't use R have switched to the version of 208 in my repo because it compiles reliably when 0.5.6 does not.

This has been outstanding since August, and it's very hard to understand a reason - you even participated in a Meetup in September where a variant of the code in the PR was used as a demonstration of Zeppelin's capabilities and potential.

Part of being an Apache project is dealing with significant PRs from outside the core development team.  Addressing these issues  for R, and Prasad's PR, seems like a good test of project maturity.  These were features on the roadmap which were supposed to be included before the first non-beta release.

> On Feb 4, 2016, at 12:50 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Thanks Sourav for interest in this discussion and very valuable opinion.
>
> I completely agree how much R and Authentication (which i believe already
> in Zeppelin) will be useful for users. And believe me, I want these
> features in Zeppelin more than anyone.
>
> But at the same time we have diversity of user bases.
> Some people might think supporting general JDBC is more practical and more
> useful feature, the other can think multi-tenancy is the most important,
> etc, etc.
>
> So, i believe Apache Top Level project is defined by how community works,
> not defined by what feature does the software includes.
>
> Regarding bringing R into main branch, I tried to make pr208 passes the CI.
> I could able to make it pass 1 test profile, but couldn't make it pass all
> other test profiles.
>
> I'm suggesting split the contribution into smaller peaces and merge one by
> one. Like Hayssam did it for his contribution of Shiro security integration
> (pr586). And I'm volunteering making pr208 into smaller PRs.
>
> Best,
> moon
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:11 PM Sourav Mazumder <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> This does make sense Moon. Completely agree with you that features are not
>> important for becoming a top level project
>>
>> However, in my opinion, from the practical usage standpoint, without these
>> two features Zeppelin does not look to me a full fledged top level project.
>> Curious whether there are any technical glitches which are impediment in
>> bringing these features to the main branch. Wondering if any help can help
>> to get those problems fixed.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sourav
>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 4:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
>>> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
>>> graduation goal.
>>>
>>> Including specific features could be valid concern for release
>> discussion,
>>> but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
>>>
>>> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in my
>>> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation vote
>>> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
>>>
>>> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and review
>>> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many contributions
>>> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul
>> and
>>> Felix helped a lot)
>>>
>>> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to the
>>> release / roadmap discussion.
>>> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
>>> evaluating
>> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> moon
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
>>> withdrawn
>>>> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from
>>> the
>>>> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the
>>>> last public discussion about graduation until today.
>>>>
>>>> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion
>> emails
>>>> that you're referring to.
>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Eran,
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and
>>> let
>>>> us
>>>>> know if that makes sense to you?
>>>>>
>>>>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but
>> after
>>>>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
>>> pre-request
>>>>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
>>> procedure
>>>> of
>>>>> graduation.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
>>>> graduation
>>>>>> from day one.
>>>>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
>>>>>> +1 for graduation after we add both
>>>>>> Eran
>>>>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
>>>> different
>>>>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it
>> to
>>>> top
>>>>>>> level.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and
>> Authentication
>>>>>> added
>>>>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people
>>> are
>>>>>>> eagerly waiting for.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Sourav
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
>>>>>>>> Let's start a vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>> moon
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <
>> [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like
>> to
>>>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
>>>>>> thread
>>>>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Alex
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Zeppelin from the Incubator

Jakob Homan
Hey all-
   A data point and observation from an ASF Member and Incubator PMC Member...

   Moon is correct that readiness for graduation is a function of
community development and adherence to the Apache Way, rather any
specific feature or tech milestones.  Since entering Incubator,
Zeppelin's had two relatively easy releases, has finished the
incubation checklist
(http://incubator.apache.org/projects/zeppelin.html), has added new
commiters, etc.  In short, Zeppelin's in a good position to graduate
from my perspective.

   Resolution of specific PRs should be handled in a speedy matter,
but there doesn't seem to be any disagreement to that - just some work
left to be done in getting them in.

-Jakob


On 3 February 2016 at 23:39, Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't see a point to splitting it. The reason we didn't merge in December is that bugs in CI prevented the tests *in* 208 from functioning. It wasn't causing anything else to fail. Now CI is broken for the project anyway. If it was going to be split, I would do that myself.
>
> The reliability of the code has been proven in the field: People who don't use R have switched to the version of 208 in my repo because it compiles reliably when 0.5.6 does not.
>
> This has been outstanding since August, and it's very hard to understand a reason - you even participated in a Meetup in September where a variant of the code in the PR was used as a demonstration of Zeppelin's capabilities and potential.
>
> Part of being an Apache project is dealing with significant PRs from outside the core development team.  Addressing these issues  for R, and Prasad's PR, seems like a good test of project maturity.  These were features on the roadmap which were supposed to be included before the first non-beta release.
>
>> On Feb 4, 2016, at 12:50 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Sourav for interest in this discussion and very valuable opinion.
>>
>> I completely agree how much R and Authentication (which i believe already
>> in Zeppelin) will be useful for users. And believe me, I want these
>> features in Zeppelin more than anyone.
>>
>> But at the same time we have diversity of user bases.
>> Some people might think supporting general JDBC is more practical and more
>> useful feature, the other can think multi-tenancy is the most important,
>> etc, etc.
>>
>> So, i believe Apache Top Level project is defined by how community works,
>> not defined by what feature does the software includes.
>>
>> Regarding bringing R into main branch, I tried to make pr208 passes the CI.
>> I could able to make it pass 1 test profile, but couldn't make it pass all
>> other test profiles.
>>
>> I'm suggesting split the contribution into smaller peaces and merge one by
>> one. Like Hayssam did it for his contribution of Shiro security integration
>> (pr586). And I'm volunteering making pr208 into smaller PRs.
>>
>> Best,
>> moon
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 2:11 PM Sourav Mazumder <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This does make sense Moon. Completely agree with you that features are not
>>> important for becoming a top level project
>>>
>>> However, in my opinion, from the practical usage standpoint, without these
>>> two features Zeppelin does not look to me a full fledged top level project.
>>> Curious whether there are any technical glitches which are impediment in
>>> bringing these features to the main branch. Wondering if any help can help
>>> to get those problems fixed.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Sourav
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 4:22 PM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> I don't think any feature (R or whatever) should be prerequisites of
>>>> graduation. Especially when a project never setup those features as a
>>>> graduation goal.
>>>>
>>>> Including specific features could be valid concern for release
>>> discussion,
>>>> but i don't think it's related to a graduation.
>>>>
>>>> Graduation is much more like if project is doing it in apache way, in my
>>>> understanding. Last time the reason why i didn't go for a graduation vote
>>>> is, because of there were valid concern about contribution impasse.
>>>>
>>>> Since that, community improved / clarified contribution guide and review
>>>> process. And Zeppelin PPMC members were trying to help many contributions
>>>> that they have been as a open PR for a long time. (Especially Jongyoul
>>> and
>>>> Felix helped a lot)
>>>>
>>>> So, let's move discussions like 'which feature should be included' to the
>>>> release / roadmap discussion.
>>>> In the graduation discussion, i'd like to have an discussions, such as
>>>> evaluating
>>> http://community.apache.org/apache-way/apache-project-maturity-model.html,
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Does this make sense for you guys? Amos, Eran, Sourav?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> moon
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 8:05 AM Amos B. Elberg <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> No Eran is right. The last vote for graduation passed-it was not
>>>> withdrawn
>>>>> in favor of releasing 0.5.6. It passed and there was some feedback from
>>>> the
>>>>> mentors concerning graduation, R, and some other issues. And that's the
>>>>> last public discussion about graduation until today.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex if you disagree with that do you have links to the discussion
>>> emails
>>>>> that you're referring to.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Alexander Bezzubov <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Eran,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks for sharing your oppinion!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you please check my previous reply about release schedulle and
>>>> let
>>>>> us
>>>>>> know if that makes sense to you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> By the way, please our mentors correct me if I'm wrong here, but
>>> after
>>>>>> reading [1] I was under impression that project does not have
>>>> pre-request
>>>>>> regarding its code or features in order to undergo this formal
>>>> procedure
>>>>> of
>>>>>> graduation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]
>>> http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Graduating+from+the+Incubator
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016, 20:04 Eran Witkon <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I recall correctly R support was one of the pre-requisite for
>>>>> graduation
>>>>>>> from day one.
>>>>>>> I agree that Authentication should be added as well.
>>>>>>> +1 for graduation after we add both
>>>>>>> Eran
>>>>>>> On Wed, 3 Feb 2016 at 20:24 Sourav Mazumder <
>>>>> [hidden email]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Surely I vote for the same. Zeppelin is already very popular in
>>>>> different
>>>>>>>> quarts of the Spark/Big Data user group. High time to graduate it
>>> to
>>>>> top
>>>>>>>> level.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, I shall suggest to have the support for R and
>>> Authentication
>>>>>>> added
>>>>>>>> to Zeppelin before that. These are the supports most of the people
>>>> are
>>>>>>>> eagerly waiting for.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Sourav
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 8:23 AM, moon soo Lee <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks Alexander for resuming the discussion.
>>>>>>>>> Let's start a vote.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>> moon
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:11 PM Alexander Bezzubov <
>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Dear Zeppelin developers,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> now, after number of releases and committers grew more I'd like
>>> to
>>>>>>>>> suggest
>>>>>>>>>> the re-new the discussion of graduating Zeppelin to top level
>>>>>>> project.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If there are on objections - next step would be to start a VOTE
>>>>>>> thread
>>>>>>>>>> here.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Alex
>>>
12345