Thanks, Neil! Please see my comments inline. On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Neil Griffin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Woonsan, > > OK, I will rollback and re-release with the header present in the following > files: > > - pom.xml > - src/main/resources/META-INF/maven/archetype-metadata.xml > - src/main/resources/META-INF/maven/archetype.xml > > Additionally, I will move from the Log4J API to the SLF4J API. > > Would it be OK if I specify "org.slf4j:slf4j-log4j12" as the logging > implementation?
Absolutely. That's how we do in most portals project right now, AFAIK. You can keep that and log4j12 as runtime scope dependencies. > > Also, if I complete the work today, then will it require a new 72 hour > voting process? I don't think so. If you re-stage it with the fixes, I'll review it and cast my vote with +1. You don't need another 72 hours. Kind regards, Woonsan > > > Thank you, > > Neil > > > On 4/25/17 11:36 AM, Woonsan Ko wrote: >> >> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Neil Griffin >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Woonsan, >>> >>> I don't think that I have the administrative privileges to fix the >>> staging >>> repository visibility problem you encountered. >>> >>> But thank you for your careful observations. Regarding the licensing, the >>> Apache 2.0 License is specified in the pom.xml descriptor of each >>> archetype: >>> >>> <license> >>> <name>Apache License, Version 2.0</name> >>> <url>http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0</url> >>> </license> >>> >>> Also, the archetype JAR artifacts contain the text of the Apache 2.0 >>> License >>> in the META-INF/LICENSE file. >>> >>> The reason why license "headers" are not present in files like >>> HelloWorldPortlet.java is because archetype files are essentially >>> templates >>> that will be used by the "mvn archetype:generate" command to create a new >>> project. The developer would then be free to apply whatever license they >>> want to their newly generated portlet project. >> >> >> It's totally fine not to have license headers in archetype-generated >> files like HelloWorldPortlet.java. >> My concerns were at these files, which are the archetype source >> itself, not generated ones, for instance: >> - pom.xml >> - src/main/resources/META-INF/maven/archetype-metadata.xml >> - src/main/resources/META-INF/maven/archetype.xml >> >> I think those three files must have license headers. >> >>> >>> Regarding log4j, I would be happy to migrate to the SLF4J API in a future >>> dot release. >> >> >> Cool! >> >>> >>> Please let me know whether or not I have addressed your concerns to your >>> satisfaction. >> >> >> Without proper license headers in those three files, I don't think >> that's qualified for a proper Apache release. >> Sometimes we miss license headers in some source files unintentionally >> in a bigger project, which might be excused, but in this case, it's >> obvious that we totally forgot adding the headers in the whole >> project, IMHO. >> >> Regards, >> >> Woonsan >> >>> >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Neil >>> >>> >>> On 4/24/17 11:46 PM, Woonsan Ko wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Neil Griffin >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear Apache Portals Pluto Team and community, >>>>> >>>>> I have staged a release candidate for the new Apache Portals Pluto >>>>> Maven >>>>> Archetypes 3.0.0 release, >>>>> which includes the following two artifacts: >>>>> >>>>> <groupId>org.apache.portals.pluto.archetype</groupId> >>>>> <artifactId>bean-portlet-archetype</artifactId> >>>>> <packaging>maven-archetype</packaging> >>>>> >>>>> <groupId>org.apache.portals.pluto.archetype</groupId> >>>>> <artifactId>generic-portlet-archetype</artifactId> >>>>> <packaging>maven-archetype</packaging> >>>>> >>>>> Please review the release candidate which is available from the >>>>> following >>>>> maven staging repository: >>>>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheportals-1016 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This link doesn't work for me. I managed to find the staging repo at >>>> https://repository.apache.org/#stagingRepositories. >>>> It shows "404 - Repository "orgapacheportals-1016 (staging: open)" >>>> [id=orgapacheportals-1016] exists but is not exposed" when clicked on, >>>> regardless whether or not I signed in https://repository.apache.org/. >>>> Does anyone know the reason? >>>> >>>>> >>>>> This vote is open for the next 72 hours. >>>>> >>>>> Please cast your vote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm not sure if it is desirable to release this. When I downloaded the >>>> bean-portlet-archetype-3.0.0-source-release.zip from the Nexus, I >>>> could hardly find source files with Apache License header [1]. Most >>>> files are missing the license header. >>>> Wouldn't it be more desirable to correct this issue first? >>>> >>>> And, one minor thing to remark is that the archetype is using log4j >>>> v1, neither slf4j nor log4j v2. AFAIK, pluto project itself and its >>>> submodules such as container have used slf4j as logging API and log4j >>>> as a default binding. Not a major, but just something to consider >>>> later perhaps... >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> Woonsan >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers >>>> >>>>> >>>>> [ ] +1 for Release >>>>> [ ] 0 for Don't care >>>>> [ ] -1 Don't release (do provide a reason then) >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Neil >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
