[RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.4.0 RC1

[Mike Percy]

Hi all,
Thank you very much to everyone who spent time validating and voting on
this release candidate!

Here are the results:

+1:
Ashish Paliwal
Mike Percy*
Alexander Alten-Lorenz
Jarek Jarcec Cecho*
Arvind Prabhakar*
Hari Shreedharan*

0:
(None)

-1:
(None)

* indicates a member of the Flume PMC

Because this vote garnered majority approval with at least 3 PMC member +1
votes, this vote has passed, and RC1 will be released as Apache Flume 1.4.0.

I will publish the artifacts to the release repositories and then send out
an announcement email in the next day or two, after the mirrors have gotten
some time to sync up with the origin server.

Thanks,
Mike

[CLOSED] [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.4.0 RC1

[Mike Percy]

This vote is now closed. I will send out a result thread shortly.

Thanks,
Mike


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Mike Percy  wrote:

> This is the fourth release for Apache Flume as a top-level project,
> version 1.4.0. We are voting on release candidate RC1.
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.4.0 RC1

[Hari Shreedharan]

Sounds good, Mike, Arvind - thanks! I guess it really is BSD-licensed! 

My vote:

+1

* Verified checksums, signatures
* Full build, runs OK.
* All top level files look good including the LICENSE file.


Thanks,
Hari


On Saturday, June 29, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Mike Percy wrote:

> Arvind, sounds reasonable to me.
> 
> Hari, any concerns with this approach?
> 
> Thanks,
> Mike
> 
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Arvind Prabhakar  (mailto:arv...@apache.org)>wrote:
> 
> > Given that there is ambiguity in terms of which license applies, and given
> > that one of these licenses is Apache Software License 2.0, my suggestion is
> > to keep BSD on record for our release. That way, we cover the more
> > restrictive case and ideally should not pose any problems.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Arvind Prabhakar
> > 
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Mike Percy  > (mailto:mpe...@apache.org)> wrote:
> > 
> > > Interesting find, Hari. These guys are really a licensing disaster.
> > However
> > > I believe Maven is wrong since the LICENSE file in their repository
> > > contains this:
> > > 
> > 
> > https://code.google.com/p/findbugs/source/browse/branches/1.3.9/findbugs/LICENSE-jsr305.txt
> > > 
> > > --
> > > The JSR-305 reference implementation (lib/jsr305.jar) is
> > > distributed under the terms of the New BSD license:
> > > 
> > > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
> > > 
> > > See the JSR-305 home page for more information:
> > > 
> > > http://code.google.com/p/jsr-305/ -- So I think it really is BSD.
> > > Thoughts? Thanks, Mike
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Hari Shreedharan <
> > > hshreedha...@cloudera.com (mailto:hshreedha...@cloudera.com)
> > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > Looks like jsr305 is actually ASL2.0 (according to the mvn central pom
> > > for
> > > > the specific version:
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails%7Ccom.google.code.findbugs%7Cjsr305%7C1.3.9%7Cjar
> > > ).
> > > > The pom installed locally also has this:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > The Apache Software License, Version
> > > > 2.0
> > > > 
> > > > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt
> > > > repo
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > The webpage on the other hand says it is BSD licensed. Maybe we should
> > > > verify this? I know the last few of our releases went out with BSD in
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > the
> > > > Licenses file.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Hari
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Friday, June 28, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > +1
> > > > > 
> > > > > * Checked license file
> > > > > * Run tests
> > > > > * Checked other top level files
> > > > > * Checked checksums and signature
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jarcec
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0700, Mike Percy wrote:
> > > > > > This is the fourth release for Apache Flume as a top-level project,
> > > > > > version 1.4.0. We are voting on release candidate RC1.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > It fixes the following issues:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flume.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG;hb=756924e96ace470289472a3bdb4d87e273ca74ef
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > *** Please cast your vote within the next 72 hours ***
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The tarball (*.tar.gz), signature (*.asc), and checksums (*.md5,
> > > > *.sha1)
> > > > > > for the source and binary artifacts can be found here:
> > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~mpercy/flume/apache-flume-1.4.0-RC1/
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflume-067/
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The tag to be voted on:
> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flume.git;a=commit;h=756924e96ace470289472a3bdb4d87e273ca74ef
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Flume's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release is
> > > > here:
> > > > > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/flume/dist/KEYS
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Mike
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.4.0 RC1

[Mike Percy]

Arvind, sounds reasonable to me.

Hari, any concerns with this approach?

Thanks,
Mike

On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:

> Given that there is ambiguity in terms of which license applies, and given
> that one of these licenses is Apache Software License 2.0, my suggestion is
> to keep BSD on record for our release. That way, we cover the more
> restrictive case and ideally should not pose any problems.
>
> Regards,
> Arvind Prabhakar
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Mike Percy  wrote:
>
> > Interesting find, Hari. These guys are really a licensing disaster.
> However
> > I believe Maven is wrong since the LICENSE file in their repository
> > contains this:
> >
> >
> >
> https://code.google.com/p/findbugs/source/browse/branches/1.3.9/findbugs/LICENSE-jsr305.txt
> >
> > --
> >  The JSR-305 reference implementation (lib/jsr305.jar) is
> >  distributed under the terms of the New BSD license:
> >
> >  http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
> >
> > See the JSR-305 home page for more information:
> >
> >  http://code.google.com/p/jsr-305/ -- So I think it really is BSD.
> > Thoughts? Thanks, Mike
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Hari Shreedharan <
> > hshreedha...@cloudera.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Looks like jsr305 is actually ASL2.0 (according to the mvn central pom
> > for
> > > the specific version:
> > >
> >
> http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails%7Ccom.google.code.findbugs%7Cjsr305%7C1.3.9%7Cjar
> > ).
> > > The pom installed locally also has this:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The Apache Software License, Version
> > > 2.0
> > > 
> > > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt
> > > repo
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > >
> > > The webpage on the other hand says it is BSD licensed. Maybe we should
> > > verify this? I know the last few of our releases went out with BSD in
> the
> > > Licenses file.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Hari
> > >
> > >
> > > On Friday, June 28, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > * Checked license file
> > > > * Run tests
> > > > * Checked other top level files
> > > > * Checked checksums and signature
> > > >
> > > > Jarcec
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0700, Mike Percy wrote:
> > > > > This is the fourth release for Apache Flume as a top-level project,
> > > > > version 1.4.0. We are voting on release candidate RC1.
> > > > >
> > > > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flume.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG;hb=756924e96ace470289472a3bdb4d87e273ca74ef
> > > > >
> > > > > *** Please cast your vote within the next 72 hours ***
> > > > >
> > > > > The tarball (*.tar.gz), signature (*.asc), and checksums (*.md5,
> > > *.sha1)
> > > > > for the source and binary artifacts can be found here:
> > > > > http://people.apache.org/~mpercy/flume/apache-flume-1.4.0-RC1/
> > > > >
> > > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > > >
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflume-067/
> > > > >
> > > > > The tag to be voted on:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flume.git;a=commit;h=756924e96ace470289472a3bdb4d87e273ca74ef
> > > > >
> > > > > Flume's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release is
> > > here:
> > > > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/flume/dist/KEYS
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Mike
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Jenkins build is back to stable : flume-trunk #467

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 

Jenkins build is unstable: flume-trunk #466

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.4.0 RC1

[Arvind Prabhakar]

+1

* Built the sources
* Verified checksums and signatures

Thanks for the hard work Mike!

Regards,
Arvind Prabhakar


On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Mike Percy  wrote:

> This is the fourth release for Apache Flume as a top-level project,
> version 1.4.0. We are voting on release candidate RC1.
>
> It fixes the following issues:
>
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flume.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG;hb=756924e96ace470289472a3bdb4d87e273ca74ef
>
> *** Please cast your vote within the next 72 hours ***
>
> The tarball (*.tar.gz), signature (*.asc), and checksums (*.md5, *.sha1)
> for the source and binary artifacts can be found here:
>   http://people.apache.org/~mpercy/flume/apache-flume-1.4.0-RC1/
>
> Maven staging repo:
>   https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflume-067/
>
> The tag to be voted on:
>
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flume.git;a=commit;h=756924e96ace470289472a3bdb4d87e273ca74ef
>
> Flume's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release is here:
>   https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/flume/dist/KEYS
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flume version 1.4.0 RC1

[Arvind Prabhakar]

Given that there is ambiguity in terms of which license applies, and given
that one of these licenses is Apache Software License 2.0, my suggestion is
to keep BSD on record for our release. That way, we cover the more
restrictive case and ideally should not pose any problems.

Regards,
Arvind Prabhakar

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:43 PM, Mike Percy  wrote:

> Interesting find, Hari. These guys are really a licensing disaster. However
> I believe Maven is wrong since the LICENSE file in their repository
> contains this:
>
>
> https://code.google.com/p/findbugs/source/browse/branches/1.3.9/findbugs/LICENSE-jsr305.txt
>
> --
>  The JSR-305 reference implementation (lib/jsr305.jar) is
>  distributed under the terms of the New BSD license:
>
>  http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php
>
> See the JSR-305 home page for more information:
>
>  http://code.google.com/p/jsr-305/ -- So I think it really is BSD.
> Thoughts? Thanks, Mike
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Hari Shreedharan <
> hshreedha...@cloudera.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Looks like jsr305 is actually ASL2.0 (according to the mvn central pom
> for
> > the specific version:
> >
> http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails%7Ccom.google.code.findbugs%7Cjsr305%7C1.3.9%7Cjar
> ).
> > The pom installed locally also has this:
> > 
> > 
> > The Apache Software License, Version
> > 2.0
> > 
> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.txt
> > repo
> > 
> > 
> >
> >
> > The webpage on the other hand says it is BSD licensed. Maybe we should
> > verify this? I know the last few of our releases went out with BSD in the
> > Licenses file.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Hari
> >
> >
> > On Friday, June 28, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > * Checked license file
> > > * Run tests
> > > * Checked other top level files
> > > * Checked checksums and signature
> > >
> > > Jarcec
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0700, Mike Percy wrote:
> > > > This is the fourth release for Apache Flume as a top-level project,
> > > > version 1.4.0. We are voting on release candidate RC1.
> > > >
> > > > It fixes the following issues:
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flume.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGELOG;hb=756924e96ace470289472a3bdb4d87e273ca74ef
> > > >
> > > > *** Please cast your vote within the next 72 hours ***
> > > >
> > > > The tarball (*.tar.gz), signature (*.asc), and checksums (*.md5,
> > *.sha1)
> > > > for the source and binary artifacts can be found here:
> > > > http://people.apache.org/~mpercy/flume/apache-flume-1.4.0-RC1/
> > > >
> > > > Maven staging repo:
> > > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflume-067/
> > > >
> > > > The tag to be voted on:
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flume.git;a=commit;h=756924e96ace470289472a3bdb4d87e273ca74ef
> > > >
> > > > Flume's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release is
> > here:
> > > > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/flume/dist/KEYS
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Mike
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>