Given that there has been no further feedback on the LICENSE/NOTICE point below, perhaps we should create a couple of issues to track them so that we can revisit before graduation? They should not block this release, but we need to do some due diligence there.
-Flavio > On 24 Jan 2017, at 02:52, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote: > > Ping? > > If there is no other strong objections here, I'd like to conclude the votes > and proceed the remaining steps for the release. > > - Sijie > > On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Flavio Junqueira <f...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> >>>> On 19 Jan 2017, at 18:42, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Flavio, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org <mailto: >>> si...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 18, 2017 10:37 AM, "Sijie Guo" <si...@apache.org <mailto: >>> si...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 17, 2017 2:58 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <f...@apache.org <mailto: >>> f...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>> +1, I have checked the following: >>>> >>>> - Built both 2.10 and 2.11 from source (skipped tests) >>>> - Checksums and signatures >>>> - NOTICE and LICENSE >>>> - Rat >>>> >>>> Questions: >>>> 1- I'm wondering if the text about Hadoop in NOTICE is necessary. How >>> did you guys end up including it? >>>> >>>> Ah, I need to check that. Can't remember why it was brought in right >>> now. >>>> >>>> I think this because we ported one class from Hadoop >>> "TestTimedOutTestsListener" - we used it for dump information when the >>> tests timed out. do you see any concerns here? what is your suggestion? >>> >>> I'm not particularly concerned, but I'm wondering if this is really >>> needed in NOTICE, simply because the guidance we have from ASF is that we >>> should change the NOTICE file only when strictly necessary. In particular, >>> this part: >>> >>> NOTICE is reserved for a certain subset of legally required notifications >>> which are not satisfied by either the text of LICENSE or the presence of >>> licensing information embedded within the bundled dependency. Aside from >>> Apache-licensed dependencies which supply NOTICE files of their own, it is >>> uncommon for a dependency to require additions to NOTICE. >>> >>> says that such changes aren't necessary for Apache-licensed dependencies, >>> but in this case, it is not really a dependency, you copied a file into >>> your code, so I'm not sure. Perhaps one of the other mentors have some >>> insight here. >>> >> >> Henry, Chris, >> >> Any thoughts about the NOTICE file here? >> >> Liang, >> >> Since you added the hadoop part in the NOTICE file, can you comment what >> was your experiences about the NOTICE file here? >> >> - Sijie >> >> >>> >>>> >>>> commit ea3c1143f9e2718d0d86e8b1c8f3a7e51ac19c4d >>>> Author: xieliang <xieliang...@gmail.com <mailto:xieliang...@gmail.com>> >>>> Date: Wed Jan 4 16:09:01 2017 -0800 >>>> >>>> DL-165: Add TestTimedOutTestsListener to dump timed out cases >>> thread dump >>>> >>>> Author: xieliang <xieliang...@gmail.com <mailto: >>> xieliang...@gmail.com>> >>>> >>>> Reviewers: Leigh Stewart <lstew...@apache.org <mailto: >>> lstew...@apache.org>> >>>> >>>> Closes #91 from xieliang/DL-165-TimedOutTestsListene >>>> >>>> >>>> 2- The tgz bundles do not include any jar directly, so there is no real >>> concern about bundling the bits from other projects that could require more >>> sections in the NOTICE file, is it right? >>>> >>>> I am clear about this part. Any principles to follow in Apache? >>>> >>>> Sorry typo => not clear about >>>> >>>> Can you comment more on this part? >>>> >>> >>> This comment is based on this: >>> >>> LICENSE and NOTICE must always be tailored to the content of the specific >>> distribution they reside within. Dependencies which are not included in the >>> distribution MUST NOT be added to LICENSE and NOTICE. As far as LICENSE and >>> NOTICE are concerned, only bundled bits matter. >>> >>> I didn't see anything specific that called my attention, and I'm doing >>> due diligence and asking. >>> >>> Both paragraphs I copied are from this page: >>> >>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html >>> >>> -Flavio >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -Flavio >>>> >>>>> On 17 Jan 2017, at 17:12, Leigh Stewart <lstew...@twitter.com.INVALID> >>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Jon Derrick < >>> jonathan.derri...@gmail.com <mailto:jonathan.derri...@gmail.com>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>>> >>>>>> LGTM. compiled the source packages and ran dbench. the license files >>> look >>>>>> good. >>>>>> >>>>>> - jd >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org >>> <mailto:si...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version >>> 0.4.0, >>>>>>> as follows: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [ ] +1, Approve the release >>>>>>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific >>> comments) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which >>> includes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * JIRA release notes [1], >>>>>>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to >>>>>> dist.apache.org <http://dist.apache.org/> >>>>>>> [2], >>>>>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository >>>>>> [3][4], >>>>>>> * source code tag "v0.4.0-incubating-RC1_2.11" (for scala 2.11) >>> and >>>>>>> "v0.4.0-incubating-RC1_2.10" (for scala 2.10) [5][6], >>>>>>> * website pull request listing the release [7] and publishing >>> the API >>>>>>> reference manual. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A simple instruction for validation the source and binary packages. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - source package: building the package with "*mvn clean >>> apache-rat:check >>>>>>> package findbugs:check -DskipTests*" >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by >>> majority >>>>>>> approval, with at least 3 PPMC affirmative votes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Sijie >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa < >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa>? >>>>>>> projectId=12320620&version=12337980 >>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/distributed >>> log/0.4.0- <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/distribute >>> dlog/0.4.0-> >>>>>>> incubating-RC2/ >>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ < >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/> >>>>>>> orgapachedistributedlog-1003/ >>>>>>> [4] >>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ < >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/> >>>>>>> orgapachedistributedlog-1004/ >>>>>>> [5] >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/tree/ < >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/tree/> >>>>>>> v0.4.0-incubating-RC1_2.11 >>>>>>> [6] >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/tree/ < >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/tree/> >>>>>>> v0.4.0-incubating-RC1_2.10 >>>>>>> [7] https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/pull/109 < >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/pull/109> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> - jderrick >>>>>> >>> >>> >>
