On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:18 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Eric, > I've included references inline for your convenience. I'll once again > [strongly] suggest you guys remove that artifact. > > Thanks, > --tim > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Eric Yang <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > > > There is LICENSE.txt and NOTICES.txt in both source and binary package. > In > > the binary package, the files are located in $PREFIX/share/doc/chukwa to > > match what standard Linux file system layout. We voted for source > release > > and there is no Apache restriction that a source release, can not > procedure > > a binary package. > > "Votes on whether a package is ready to be released use majority > approval -- i.e., at least three PMC members must vote affirmatively > for release, and there must be more positive than negative votes." > > Each vote is on signed, hashed artifacts, so yes, if you say it's a > "source vote" then no binary should accompany it. > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release > > > There is also no restriction that binary release must > > have LICENSE.txt and NOTICES.txt in the top level directory. > > How do you reach that understanding from the sentence below? > > "Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the top > directory, along with the standard LICENSE file." > > http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Maybe my subscription was confirmed yet the first time I sent this... > >> > >> > >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >> > >> Hi Chukwa devs, > >> I noticed you have a binary convenience artifact in the release > >> location[1] that doesn't have a LICENSE or a NOTICE in it. In looking > >> back at the release vote[2][3], it seems like you chose to only vote a > >> source release (admittedly easier). > >> > >> You can't vote on a source-only release and then also release the > >> binary artifact. I think you guys should remove the binary from dist. > >> > >> Then, there's the potential that I'm missing something here, in which > >> case, I'd appreciate an explanation:) > >> > >> Thanks, > >> --tim > >> > >> [1] - http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/chukwa/chukwa-0.5.0/ > >> [2] - > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-chukwa-dev/201201.mbox/%3CCADfbTpHnVv5gm9UxewmTt377VpUZHzaLG%3D37mNoxXbj%3D6QTBwQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E > >> > >> [3] - > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-chukwa-dev/201201.mbox/%3CCADfbTpEZfsDqF%2BuS2r8pqQYF%3DyEoj_gOcR8U-ptUeQHOsUdFNg%40mail.gmail.com%3E > >> > +1, only artifacts reviewed and approved by votes should be distributed as a release. If a release is providing a source tarball, binary tarball, and maven binaries, then all these should be reviewed and voted as part of the release, otherwise they should not be distributed. -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
