Hello,

I guess there is some kind of incompleteness between the files but it
doesn't look like a LICENSE violation. It would be good to find a way
to somehow align the information in the LICENSE files but I guess we
don't necessarily need to block the release for that. Let's log a JIRA
ticket and discuss there on how we can improve the current situation.

The logic for generating the LICENSE file is driven by the
Apache2LicenseRenderer [1] task and most of the license collection
logic lies inside the release/build.gradle.kts file

Best,
Stamatis

[1] 
https://github.com/apache/calcite/blob/00e09ac15e09f2e1bd49a8b461818bb0ae47dfbc/release/build.gradle.kts#L129C34-L129C56

On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 6:55 PM Alessandro Solimando
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
> in preparation of the RC0 of 1.40.0 I have run "./gradlew prepareVote
> -Prc=0" against the asf-like-environment, and checked the generated files.
>
> All seems OK, apart from the LICENSE file which, according to the How-To
> <https://calcite.apache.org/docs/howto.html#making-a-release-candidate> should
> be identical between the source distribution and what is in git, but it's
> currently different:
>
> $ diff ~/git/calcite/LICENSE
> > ~/Downloads/calcite_release/apache-calcite-1.40.0-src/LICENSE
> > 184,185d183
> > < * font-awesome:font-awesome-code:4.2.0
> > < site/_sass/_font-awesome.scss
> > 187c185
> > < site/_sass/_gridism.scss
> > ---
> > > * font-awesome:font-awesome-code:4.2.0
> > 189,194d186
> > < site/css/screen.scss
> > < site/_includes/*.html
> > < site/_layouts/*.html
> > < site/news/releases/index.html
> > < site/_sass/_mixins.scss
> > < site/_sass/_pygments.scss
> > 196,200d187
> > < site/_sass/_normalize.scss
> > <
> > < SIL Open Font License
> > < * lato-fonts:lato
> > < site/_sass/_lato.scss
> > ~/Downloads/calcite_release/apache-calcite-1.40.0-src
>
>
> To be honest, I don't know how the LICENSE file gets generated for the
> source distribution, but it's clearly not using what's in git (and I
> doubt the check-list would mention to check it, if that was the case).
>
> Shall I update the one in git with what gets generated in the source
> distribution?
>
> Looking at git history I can see that it has been manually updated over
> time for specific cases, so replacing the content looks weird to me, but I
> have no other ideas on how to reconcile the two.
>
> Best regards,
> Alessandro

Reply via email to