Sorry, me again.

 

As these two codebases are being brought over into two separate repos, and 
referred to as distinct entities, do they need separate Codebase IP Clearance 
XML files and then separate entries in index.xml ?

 

Kind regards

 

Paul Angus

 

From: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 11:14 AM
To: pau...@apache.org; priv...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: IP clearance officer for accepting Terraform

 

There are two codebases referred in the new git repositories:

 

CloudStack Terraform Provider: 
https://github.com/xanzy/terraform-provider-cloudstack to be imported at 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-terraform-provider

CloudStack Go SDK: https://github.com/xanzy/go-cloudstack to be imported at 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-go (this one is required by the Terraform 
provider as a library)

 

Regards.


  

  

  _____  

From: pau...@apache.org <mailto:pau...@apache.org>  <pau...@apache.org 
<mailto:pau...@apache.org> >
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 15:36
To: priv...@cloudstack.apache.org <mailto:priv...@cloudstack.apache.org>  
<priv...@cloudstack.apache.org <mailto:priv...@cloudstack.apache.org> >
Cc: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com <mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> >
Subject: RE: IP clearance officer for accepting Terraform 

 

Please could some one give me the exact way that the Terraform code is going to 
be referred to, I’ve seen a few different ones.

 

eg

- Terraform Provider and Go SDK

- CloudStack Terraform Provider

- CloudStack Terraform

- Terraform Provider CloudStack

 

 

 

Kind regards

 

Paul Angus

 

From: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com <mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> 
> 
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 10:23 AM
To: pau...@apache.org <mailto:pau...@apache.org> ; 
priv...@cloudstack.apache.org <mailto:priv...@cloudstack.apache.org> 
Subject: Re: IP clearance officer for accepting Terraform

 

Hi Paul,

 

The IP clearance officer needs to do that after due diligence of the outline 
XML file, so I only committed the cloudstack-terraform.xml outline file but did 
not add it to the index.xml. Let me know if you need assistance in doing that 
(i.e. unable to svn commit?).

 

Regards.


  

  

  _____  

From: pau...@apache.org <mailto:pau...@apache.org>  <pau...@apache.org 
<mailto:pau...@apache.org> >
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2021 14:12
To: priv...@cloudstack.apache.org <mailto:priv...@cloudstack.apache.org>  
<priv...@cloudstack.apache.org <mailto:priv...@cloudstack.apache.org> >
Cc: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com <mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com> >
Subject: RE: IP clearance officer for accepting Terraform 

 

Hi All,

After committing the  cloudstack-terraform.xml  file, the next step is to 'add 
a row to the table at incubator/public/trunk/content/ip-clearance/index.xml'.
I couldn't find a row for ' cloudstack-terraform.xml'  in the index.xml file.  
Is it staring me I the face or has it not been done?

I've added it as another step in 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/5159 for tracking.

Kind regards

Paul Angus

-----Original Message-----
From: Rohit Yadav <ro...@apache.org <mailto:ro...@apache.org> > 
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2021 4:12 PM
To: pau...@apache.org <mailto:pau...@apache.org> ; 
<priv...@cloudstack.apache.org <mailto:priv...@cloudstack.apache.org> > 
<priv...@cloudstack.apache.org <mailto:priv...@cloudstack.apache.org> >
Cc: Rohit Yadav <ro...@apache.org <mailto:ro...@apache.org> >; Incubator 
General <general@incubator.apache.org <mailto:general@incubator.apache.org> >; 
Daniel Widdis <wid...@gmail.com <mailto:wid...@gmail.com> >
Subject: Re: IP clearance officer for accepting Terraform

Thanks Daniel for confirming. In that case I think we don't have any 
outstanding concerns, all the guidance and advice we've received on this thread 
has been attempted and resolved.

Hi Paul - I think both Daniel and Justin have been answered and we can 
continue. Kindly review and start a formal "[IP CLEARANCE]" thread on 
general@incubator as per 
https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.html#process
tracking the IP clearance at
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/5159

Regards.

On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 1:00 PM Daniel Widdis <wid...@gmail.com 
<mailto:wid...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
> I have no concerns.  I am not a member of the IPMC, just an interested 
> participant in the conversation.
>
> On 7/11/21, 11:25 PM, "Rohit Yadav" <ro...@apache.org 
> <mailto:ro...@apache.org> > wrote:
>
>     Hi Daniel, Justin, IPMC,
>
>     Are you happy with the answers to satisfaction? Do you have any other
>     questions/concerns, or can we continue with the IP clearance vote?
>     It has been three weeks since this thread, while the Apache CloudStack
>     PMC has passed the vote to accept donations in April 2021. If there
>     are any, can you advise by the end of tomorrow?
>
>     Regards.
>
>     On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 10:56 AM Rohit Yadav <ro...@apache.org 
> <mailto:ro...@apache.org> > wrote:
>     >
>     > Hi Justin,
>     >
>     > Yes that's right, there's no 3rd party code in the latest codebase/tags 
> that is being donated. And yes, the large commits that brought the 3rd party 
> code in vendor directory have been all removed too.
>     >
>     > Regards.
>     >
>     > On Sat, 10 Jul, 2021, 6:26 am Justin Mclean, <jus...@classsoftware.com 
> <mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com> > wrote:
>     >>
>     >> Hi,
>     >>
>     >> > However, if you compare the changes in above commits against the
>     >> > repositories being donated the "vendor" directory does not exist now
>     >> > in both the repositories being donated:
>     >> > https://github.com/xanzy/go-cloudstack
>     >> > https://github.com/xanzy/terraform-provider-cloudstack (for example
>     >> > vendor removed in this commit -
>     >> > 
> https://github.com/xanzy/terraform-provider-cloudstack/commit/4db2f701592b5af74376f5b138624bff75763152)
>     >>
>     >> So what you are saying is that all of those large commits have been 
> removed? What I would be concerned about happening is if a large amount of 
> 3rd party code incorrectly gets an ASF header on it. There no issue with 3rd 
> party code in the repo but it must be clearly marked, have the correct non 
> ASF header and its license compatible with the Apache license. Looking at the 
> repos all headers are ASF ones, is there any 3rd party code in the donated 
> code?
>     >>
>     >> Thanks,
>     >> Justin
>     >>
>
>

Reply via email to