Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE

[vongosling]

Hi,

@Eya Badal Abdisho  we must start a formal
discussion before the call for a vote. In addition, I'm more concerned
about the activities of our community than that. Our mailing list doesn't
seem to see the voice of discussion. If there's any confusion, please raise
it ：-0

There is some default output when we call for a discussion or vote for some
release, which includes not only the source(or bin) tarball location as
here. but also including git tag, keys location, and other necessary
references, such as release notes. The following is an example like this:

The git tag to be voted upon:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/tree/0.6.0-rc0



The git commit hash:

2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2
https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/commit/2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2



THE SOURCE TARBALL CAN BE FOUND AT:

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/0.6.0/rc0/



The fingerprint of key to sign release artifacts:
1CEF 33FA 6180 0117 BDB2  E0E0 D51E A8F0 0EE7 9B28

Release artifacts are signed with one of the keys available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/KEYS


Eya Badal  于2021年1月20日周三 上午12:18写道：

> Thank you very much for your feedback and suggestions. I will change the
> disclaimer to WIP also we will not include the file regarding the
> OpneCypher.
>
> I will call for a VOTE after the changes soon.
>
> Best regards,
> Eya
>
> On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung  wrote:
> > Thanks for the updates.
> >
> > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is
> off (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache
> license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just
> easier to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to
> go this route or not.
> >
> > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best
> not to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best
> not to include files, source code etc from another project because then
> proper attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file)
> >
> > See bundled dependencies here
> https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html
> >
> >
> > 
> > From: Eya Badal 
> > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM
> > To: dev@age.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
> >
> > Hi Felix,
> >
> > I just want to mention some points.
> >
> > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names
> is fixed now.
> > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source
> distribution.
> > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it
> is included.
> > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP:
> > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have
> to go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice?
> >
> > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks
> so I am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer.
> Please advise.
> >
> > We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung  wrote:
> > > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and
> content.
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > > From: Eya Badal 
> > > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM
> > > To: dev@age.apache.org 
> > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
> > >
> > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback.
> > > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list
> and ask everyone to vote?
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung 
> wrote:
> > > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it
> shouldn’t be just the mentor.
> > > >
> > > > A good vote thread might be like:
> > > >
> http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html
> > > >
> > > > 1. md5 - should not include
> > > >I will remove this file.
> > > >
> > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a
> apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip
> > > >  and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/
> > > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file.
> > > >
> > > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make
> sure it is consistent.
> > > >
> > > > 3.
> > > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP
> > > >
> https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers
> > > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer?
> > > >
> > > > 4.

Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE

[Eya Badal]

Thank you very much for your feedback and suggestions. I will change the 
disclaimer to WIP also we will not include the file regarding the OpneCypher. 

I will call for a VOTE after the changes soon. 

Best regards, 
Eya 

On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung  wrote: 
> Thanks for the updates.
> 
> For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is off 
> (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache 
> license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just easier 
> to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to go this 
> route or not.
> 
> For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best not 
> to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best not 
> to include files, source code etc from another project because then proper 
> attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file)
> 
> See bundled dependencies here https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html
> 
> 
> 
> From: Eya Badal 
> Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM
> To: dev@age.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
> 
> Hi Felix,
> 
> I just want to mention some points.
> 
> 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names is 
> fixed now.
> 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source 
> distribution.
> 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it is 
> included.
> 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP:
> We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have to go 
> by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice?
> 
> All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks so I 
> am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. Please 
> advise.
> 
> We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung  wrote:
> > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and content.
> >
> >
> > 
> > From: Eya Badal 
> > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM
> > To: dev@age.apache.org 
> > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
> >
> > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback.
> > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list and 
> > >ask everyone to vote?
> >
> >
> > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung  wrote:
> > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be 
> > > just the mentor.
> > >
> > > A good vote thread might be like:
> > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html
> > >
> > > 1. md5 - should not include
> > >I will remove this file.
> > >
> > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a 
> > > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip
> > >  and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/
> > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file.
> > >
> > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure 
> > >it is consistent.
> > >
> > > 3.
> > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP
> > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers
> > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer?
> > >
> > > 4.
> > > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf
> > > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is there 
> > > a possible licensing issue?
> > >
> > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache 
> > >License as well which is included in the licensing file.
> > > 5,
> > > KEYS.txt
> > > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git 
> > > repo
> > > I will remove this as well.
> > >
> > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or 
> > >thoughts.
> > > 
> > >
> > > From: Eya Badal 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM
> > > To: dev@age.apache.org 
> > > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
> > >
> > > Dear Mentors,
> > >
> > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the 
> > > following link:
> > >
> > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/
> > >
> > > Could you please review and approve.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Eya
> > >
> >
>