Dear @ vongosling <fengji...@gmail.com> understood. Thank you very much for your guidance and feedback. It is our first release and we are learning the process of calling for a VOTE so thanks for the great tips. We will follow the formal format for a discussion and vote from now on.
Regarding the "the voice of discussion" we would like to hear more since we might be confused just a bit. Could you please give us more guidance on the discussion and community activities for our mailing list? We will start the formal discussion soon before calling for a vote. Thank you. On 2021/01/20 01:10:33, vongosling <fengji...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > @Eya Badal Abdisho <eya.abdi...@bitnine.net> we must start a formal > discussion before the call for a vote. In addition, I'm more concerned > about the activities of our community than that. Our mailing list doesn't > seem to see the voice of discussion. If there's any confusion, please raise > it ：-0 > > There is some default output when we call for a discussion or vote for some > release, which includes not only the source(or bin) tarball location as > here. but also including git tag, keys location, and other necessary > references, such as release notes. The following is an example like this: > > The git tag to be voted upon: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/tree/0.6.0-rc0 > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-ratis-thirdparty/tree/0.6.0-rc0> > > > The git commit hash: > > 2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2 > https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/commit/2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2 > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-ratis-thirdparty/commit/2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2> > > > THE SOURCE TARBALL CAN BE FOUND AT: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/0.6.0/rc0/ > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/thirdparty/0.6.0/rc0/> > > > The fingerprint of key to sign release artifacts: > 1CEF 33FA 6180 0117 BDB2 E0E0 D51E A8F0 0EE7 9B28 > > Release artifacts are signed with one of the keys available at: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/KEYS > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/KEYS> > > Eya Badal <e...@apache.org> 于2021年1月20日周三 上午12:18写道： > > > Thank you very much for your feedback and suggestions. I will change the > > disclaimer to WIP also we will not include the file regarding the > > OpneCypher. > > > > I will call for a VOTE after the changes soon. > > > > Best regards, > > Eya > > > > On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung <felixcheun...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > Thanks for the updates. > > > > > > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is > > off (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache > > license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just > > easier to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to > > go this route or not. > > > > > > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best > > not to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best > > not to include files, source code etc from another project because then > > proper attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file) > > > > > > See bundled dependencies here > > https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Eya Badal <e...@apache.org> > > > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > Hi Felix, > > > > > > I just want to mention some points. > > > > > > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names > > is fixed now. > > > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source > > distribution. > > > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it > > is included. > > > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: > > > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have > > to go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? > > > > > > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks > > so I am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. > > Please advise. > > > > > > We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung <felixcheun...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and > > content. > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Eya Badal <e...@apache.org> > > > > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > > > > To: dev@age.apache.org <dev@age.apache.org> > > > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > > > > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list > > and ask everyone to vote? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung <felixcheun...@hotmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it > > shouldn’t be just the mentor. > > > > > > > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > > > > > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > > > > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > > > > >I will remove this file. > > > > > > > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > > > > > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > > > > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > > > > > > > > > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make > > sure it is consistent. > > > > > > > > > > 3. > > > > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > > > > > > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers > > > > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > > > > > > > > > 4. > > > > > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > > > > > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is > > there a possible licensing issue? > > > > > > > > > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache > > License as well which is included in the licensing file. > > > > > 5, > > > > > KEYS.txt > > > > > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in > > git repo > > > > > I will remove this as well. > > > > > > > > > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions > > or thoughts. > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal <e...@apache.org> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > > > > > To: dev@age.apache.org <dev@age.apache.org> > > > > > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mentors, > > > > > > > > > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the > > following link: > > > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > > > > > > > > > Could you please review and approve. > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > Eya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Nothing is impossible >
