👍 On Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 2:19 PM PJ Fanning <[email protected]> wrote:
> The sf-hamilton pypi package is important and needs to have a LICENSE > that describes everything in. The less 3rd party code in there, the > simpler it is to manage the license. > More important as far as the ASF is concerned is the source release. > It is a 100% requirement from ASF to release the source as part of an > official release. > This is usually a tarball and should contain enough of the source that > a user can build everything they need from the source release. > The source release is a point in time copy of the source code that is > checked into git. You can choose to exclude some of the files in the > git repo from the source release if they are not needed by users to > build Hamilton (eg a local copy of sf-hamilton). > The source release has a LICENSE and NOTICE and any 3rd party source > code in the source needs to be acknowledged in the LICENSE and > possibly NOTICE. > > * https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html > * https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html > * > https://incubator.apache.org/cookbook/#two_phase_vote_on_podling_releases > * https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#releases > > On Sat, 6 Sept 2025 at 22:05, Stefan Krawczyk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Sure. > > > > If it's what we ship in the "source release", then in python we don't > > include the whole repo. We only include the files to run and modify the > > project. > > > > Examples for Hamilton are not packaged or required to run or modify the > > project. > > > > This is by default how python packages work; the is no compilation, and > > once installed locally you can modify things as you wish because it's an > > interpreted language. That's also why we have so many packages in this > > repo. > > > > Does that make sense? Otherwise the default view that the repo is the > > source release doesn't make sense with how we have structured our > > repository; there is so much other stuff here that isn't required to run > or > > build the project. But if the Apache tooling assumes this, then we'll > just > > have to say what other MIT and Apache licensed things we have in the > source > > release then... > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 6, 2025, 1:43 PM pjfanning (via GitHub) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > pjfanning commented on issue #1368: > > > URL: > > > https://github.com/apache/hamilton/issues/1368#issuecomment-3263192713 > > > > > > It is not just about the license - it affects the LICENSE file that > > > Hamilton ships in its source releases. All 3rd party source code needs > to > > > be mentioned in including what license type applies. For non Apache > > > licenses on 3rd party source, we need to embed the full license text. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. > > > To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the > > > URL above to go to the specific comment. > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: > > > [email protected] > > > > > > >
