Thanks for the response, Andrew!
I've started knocking out the source-release issues. Will put up a patch
with how far I get tonight.
Andrew Purtell wrote:
With PMC hat on I am -1 releasing with known policy violations. This is the
same position I took when it was HBase releases at issue. Option 1 is not a
good option. Let's go with another.
On Jul 18, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote:
(Moving this over to its own thread to avoid bogging down the VOTE further)
PMC, what say you? I have cycles to work on this now.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.8.0-HBase-1.2 RC0
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 14:43:54 -0400
From: Josh Elser<josh.el...@gmail.com>
To: dev@phoenix.apache.org
Sean Busbey wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Ankit Singhal
<ankitsingha...@gmail.com> wrote:
Now we have three options to go forward with 4.8 release (or whether to
include licenses and notices for the dependency used now or later):-
*Option 1:- Go with this RC0 for 4.8 release.*
-- As the build is functionally good and stable.
-- It has been delayed already and there are some project which are
relying on this(as 4.8 works with HBase 1.2)
-- We have been releasing like this from past few releases.
-- RC has binding votes required for go head.
-- Fix license and notice issue in future releases.
I would *strongly* recommend the PMC not take Option 1's course of
action. ASF policy on necessary licensing work is very clear.
Additionally, if the current LICENSE/NOTICE work is sufficiently
inaccurate that it fails to meet the licensing requirements of bundled
works then the PMC will have moved from accidental nonconformance in
prior releases to knowingly violating the licenses of those works in
this release. Reading the JIRAs that Josh was helpful enough to file,
it sounds like the current artifacts would in fact violate the
licenses of bundled works.
In case my opinions weren't already brutally clear: the issue is not the
functionality of the software "Apache Phoenix". This issue is that this
release candidate clearly violates ASF policy. Quite certainly option
one would result in escalation to the board -- I don't know how that
will play out. It's not meant to be a threat, either, but a reality.
This is one of the core responsibilities of the PMC. There really isn't
any wiggle room.
I can start knocking out the issues I created -- I really don't think
this will take more than a day or two for the source release and the
binary artifact.
