Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator and community advice seemed contradictory. I would like a general sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE files are unacceptable before I make changes. The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out. For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s): --- Apache ManifestCF Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). --- and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The NOTICE file should only include required notices, the other text thats in the current NOTICE file could go in a README file, see http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice For the LICENSE file, it should start with the AL as the current one does, and then include the text for all the other licenses used in the distribution. Those license that are currently in the NOTICE file should be moved to the LICENSE file and then you need to verify that all the 3rd party dependencies in the src and binary distributions are also in the LICENSE files of those distributions. ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble describing components and their licenses. I will remove the preamble - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an example. The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form. If you think I should move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time to indicate that. Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator and community advice seemed contradictory. I would like a general sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE files are unacceptable before I make changes. The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out. For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s): --- Apache ManifestCF Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). --- and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The NOTICE file should only include required notices, the other text thats in the current NOTICE file could go in a README file, see http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice For the LICENSE file, it should start with the AL as the current one does, and then include the text for all the other licenses used in the distribution. Those license that are currently in the NOTICE file should be moved to the LICENSE file and then you need to verify that all the 3rd party dependencies in the src and binary distributions are also in the LICENSE files of those distributions. ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
That NOTICE file still contains additional text about Jetty and HSQLDB, why is that needed? The Apache License section 4d describes what must be included in the NOTICE and AIUI it says you only need to include in your NOTICE the notices from Jetty and HSQLDB if you distribute derivitave works of them. Thats not what you're doing you are distributing copies of the them not Derivative Works so nothing is needed in your NOTICE file. ...ant On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Rather than spin a whole new RC and upload it, which takes me two hours, I've attached the revised proposed NOTICE and LICENSE here, so people can comment directly. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble describing components and their licenses. I will remove the preamble - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an example. The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form. If you think I should move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time to indicate that. Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator and community advice seemed contradictory. I would like a general sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE files are unacceptable before I make changes. The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out. For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s): --- Apache ManifestCF Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). --- and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The NOTICE file should only include required notices, the other text thats in the current NOTICE file could go in a README file, see http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice For the LICENSE file, it should start with the AL as the current one does, and then include the text for all the other licenses used in the distribution. Those license that are currently in the NOTICE file should be moved to the LICENSE file and then you need to verify that all the 3rd party dependencies in the src and binary distributions are also in the LICENSE files of those distributions. ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
It is true that we've created no derivative Jetty or HSQLDB works. But the Apache License 4(d) section does not explicitly mention Jetty and HSQLDB as not requiring NOTICE text, and my understanding is that the license terms for those components require the text I have included in NOTICE. I am checking with Solr/Lucene to find out why they concluded they needed that text, but that may take a while. They too are not including this because they've created derivative works. My guess is that it has something to do with the following Apache policy: # The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required third-party notices. The NOTICE file may also include copyright notices moved from source files submitted to the ASF. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 6:36 AM, ant elder antel...@apache.org wrote: That NOTICE file still contains additional text about Jetty and HSQLDB, why is that needed? The Apache License section 4d describes what must be included in the NOTICE and AIUI it says you only need to include in your NOTICE the notices from Jetty and HSQLDB if you distribute derivitave works of them. Thats not what you're doing you are distributing copies of the them not Derivative Works so nothing is needed in your NOTICE file. ...ant On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Rather than spin a whole new RC and upload it, which takes me two hours, I've attached the revised proposed NOTICE and LICENSE here, so people can comment directly. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble describing components and their licenses. I will remove the preamble - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an example. The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form. If you think I should move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time to indicate that. Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator and community advice seemed contradictory. I would like a general sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE files are unacceptable before I make changes. The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out. For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s): --- Apache ManifestCF Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). --- and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The NOTICE file should only include required notices, the other text thats in the current NOTICE file could go in a README file, see http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice For the LICENSE file, it should start with the AL as the current one does, and then include the text for all the other licenses used in the distribution. Those license that are currently in the NOTICE file should be moved to the LICENSE file and then you need to verify that all the 3rd party dependencies in the src and binary distributions are also in the LICENSE files of those distributions. ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
Note: the NOTICE year will need to be changed for the next release to 2010-2011. For the current release I think it can remain as is - there don't seem to have been any substantive changes made in 2011. The leading blank lines need to be removed. Otherwise, I concur with what Ant has mentioned elsethread. The NOTICE file needs to be as short as possible; think of it as an About box. Generally at most one or two lines are needed per product (as for ASF code) So for any products that *require* a notice, the following should be enough: === This product contains MegaCorp FOO Copyright (c) 1995-2000 by the MegaCorp Universal Corporation === The full details go in the LICENSE file. On 8 January 2011 11:05, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Rather than spin a whole new RC and upload it, which takes me two hours, I've attached the revised proposed NOTICE and LICENSE here, so people can comment directly. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble describing components and their licenses. I will remove the preamble - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an example. The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form. If you think I should move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time to indicate that. Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator and community advice seemed contradictory. I would like a general sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE files are unacceptable before I make changes. The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out. For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s): --- Apache ManifestCF Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). --- and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The NOTICE file should only include required notices, the other text thats in the current NOTICE file could go in a README file, see http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice For the LICENSE file, it should start with the AL as the current one does, and then include the text for all the other licenses used in the distribution. Those license that are currently in the NOTICE file should be moved to the LICENSE file and then you need to verify that all the 3rd party dependencies in the src and binary distributions are also in the LICENSE files of those distributions. ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
I've made the 2011 change already. But I'm having trouble reconciling your instructions with this part of the Apache license: (d) If the Work includes a NOTICE text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. To the best of my knowledge, both remaining proposed NOTICE clauses come from a NOTICE file or the equivalent in the source work. The meaning of Derivative Work is obviously what the question is - does inclusion imply derivation? Because, we are including it. The short notices you are recommending I can certainly put back in, but that goes directly against ant elder's request that they be removed. Indeed, it sounded to me like he thought there should be nothing in NOTICE.txt other than the header. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:51 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: Note: the NOTICE year will need to be changed for the next release to 2010-2011. For the current release I think it can remain as is - there don't seem to have been any substantive changes made in 2011. The leading blank lines need to be removed. Otherwise, I concur with what Ant has mentioned elsethread. The NOTICE file needs to be as short as possible; think of it as an About box. Generally at most one or two lines are needed per product (as for ASF code) So for any products that *require* a notice, the following should be enough: === This product contains MegaCorp FOO Copyright (c) 1995-2000 by the MegaCorp Universal Corporation === The full details go in the LICENSE file. On 8 January 2011 11:05, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Rather than spin a whole new RC and upload it, which takes me two hours, I've attached the revised proposed NOTICE and LICENSE here, so people can comment directly. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble describing components and their licenses. I will remove the preamble - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an example. The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form. If you think I should move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time to indicate that. Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator and community advice seemed contradictory. I would like a general sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE files are unacceptable before I make changes. The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out. For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s): --- Apache ManifestCF Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). --- and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The NOTICE file should only include required notices, the other text thats in the current NOTICE file could go in a README file, see http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice For the LICENSE file, it should start with the AL as the current one does, and then include the text for all the other licenses used in the distribution. Those license that are currently in the NOTICE file should be moved to the LICENSE file and then you need to verify that all the 3rd party dependencies in the src
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
I've confirmed the following: (1) The Jetty notice text I've included came from the source Jetty NOTICE file. (2) The HSQLDB notice text I've included is NOT the same as the HSQLDB license text, and very likely came from an HSQLDB NOTICE file also. So, if I'm doing it wrong, at least I'm being consistent. There is NO license information in NOTICE.txt, as it stands now. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: I've made the 2011 change already. But I'm having trouble reconciling your instructions with this part of the Apache license: (d) If the Work includes a NOTICE text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. To the best of my knowledge, both remaining proposed NOTICE clauses come from a NOTICE file or the equivalent in the source work. The meaning of Derivative Work is obviously what the question is - does inclusion imply derivation? Because, we are including it. The short notices you are recommending I can certainly put back in, but that goes directly against ant elder's request that they be removed. Indeed, it sounded to me like he thought there should be nothing in NOTICE.txt other than the header. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 9:51 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: Note: the NOTICE year will need to be changed for the next release to 2010-2011. For the current release I think it can remain as is - there don't seem to have been any substantive changes made in 2011. The leading blank lines need to be removed. Otherwise, I concur with what Ant has mentioned elsethread. The NOTICE file needs to be as short as possible; think of it as an About box. Generally at most one or two lines are needed per product (as for ASF code) So for any products that *require* a notice, the following should be enough: === This product contains MegaCorp FOO Copyright (c) 1995-2000 by the MegaCorp Universal Corporation === The full details go in the LICENSE file. On 8 January 2011 11:05, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: Rather than spin a whole new RC and upload it, which takes me two hours, I've attached the revised proposed NOTICE and LICENSE here, so people can comment directly. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: The current NOTICE file has exactly what you specify, plus a preamble describing components and their licenses. I will remove the preamble - it was based on the Solr/Lucene NOTICE which I was told to use as an example. The LICENSE file, on the other hand, should currently have everything that's in the NOTICE file in expanded form. If you think I should move the preamble to the LICENSE file as well, this would be the time to indicate that. Otherwise, the preamble will just be deleted. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 5:06 AM, ant elder ant.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: - I have made no changes to NOTICE and LICENSE, because the incubator and community advice seemed contradictory. I would like a general sense of how many people feel that the current NOTICE and LICENSE files are unacceptable before I make changes. The NOTICE file is still incorrect and includes a lot of unnecessary stuff. Understanding how to do releases with the correct legal files is one of the important parts of incubation and as this is the first release for the poddling i think this needs to be sorted out. For the NOTICE file, start with the following text (between the ---'s): --- Apache ManifestCF Copyright 2010 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). --- and then add _nothing_ unless you can find explicit policy documented somewhere in the ASF that says it is required. If someone wants to add something ask for the URL where the requirement is documented. The NOTICE file should only include
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
On Jan 8, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Karl Wright wrote: I've made the 2011 change already. But I'm having trouble reconciling your instructions with this part of the Apache license: (d) If the Work includes a NOTICE text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. To the best of my knowledge, both remaining proposed NOTICE clauses come from a NOTICE file or the equivalent in the source work. The meaning of Derivative Work is obviously what the question is - does inclusion imply derivation? Because, we are including it. The confusion is understandable. The Free Software Foundation's definition of derivative work would probably apply to anything that is included to create the larger work. We aren't the Free Software Foundation. IAround here you will find the definition of derivative work to mean that you have taken the original work and made changes to it - regardless of any other code that might use the included work. So if you are just including a jar and using the interfaces it exposes then yours is not a derivative work of the first. At the beginning of the Apache License you will find the definition of derivative work Derivative Works shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of, the Work and Derivative Works thereof.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
Ok, so then it sounds like all of the current contents of NOTICE.txt can technically be removed. Where should these go? LICENSE.txt? README.txt? The circular file? I've received one recommendation for each. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote: On Jan 8, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Karl Wright wrote: I've made the 2011 change already. But I'm having trouble reconciling your instructions with this part of the Apache license: (d) If the Work includes a NOTICE text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. To the best of my knowledge, both remaining proposed NOTICE clauses come from a NOTICE file or the equivalent in the source work. The meaning of Derivative Work is obviously what the question is - does inclusion imply derivation? Because, we are including it. The confusion is understandable. The Free Software Foundation's definition of derivative work would probably apply to anything that is included to create the larger work. We aren't the Free Software Foundation. IAround here you will find the definition of derivative work to mean that you have taken the original work and made changes to it - regardless of any other code that might use the included work. So if you are just including a jar and using the interfaces it exposes then yours is not a derivative work of the first. At the beginning of the Apache License you will find the definition of derivative work Derivative Works shall mean any work, whether in Source or Object form, that is based on (or derived from) the Work and for which the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship. For the purposes of this License, Derivative Works shall not include works that remain separable from, or merely link (or bind by name) to the interfaces of, the Work and Derivative Works thereof. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
Hi Karl, For consistency and for the purposes of VOTE'ing on the bits at your RC URL that will actually get copied to Apache's distribution servers, I'd like to see you create another RC directory. You don't have to respin the RC code, just copy the current contents into a new directory with a new RC rev # and include your three updated text files in it from here. I would also like to see a new [VOTE] thread, like this: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 RC #N That way it's clear in mailing list threads how many +1s were attained, etc., without having to do a lot of detective work. Thanks for working the process. Trust me: it gets easier :) Once the above is done, I don't foresee any objections from me! Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Karl Wright wrote: I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and LICENSE.txt. Any further comments? Karl LICENSE.txtNOTICE.txtREADME.txt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
One other note: We probably should also see an SVN tag (or branch) URL in your release [VOTE] thread, so folks can also inspect the bits there. It's important to know what we're VOTE'ing on is consistent with what's in SVN. Honestly, as much as it would suck to spend another 2 hours of time, I'm wondering if it's just best to create another tag or branch in SVN and re-spin the release for consistency. Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 1:24 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: Hi Karl, For consistency and for the purposes of VOTE'ing on the bits at your RC URL that will actually get copied to Apache's distribution servers, I'd like to see you create another RC directory. You don't have to respin the RC code, just copy the current contents into a new directory with a new RC rev # and include your three updated text files in it from here. I would also like to see a new [VOTE] thread, like this: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 RC #N That way it's clear in mailing list threads how many +1s were attained, etc., without having to do a lot of detective work. Thanks for working the process. Trust me: it gets easier :) Once the above is done, I don't foresee any objections from me! Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Karl Wright wrote: I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and LICENSE.txt. Any further comments? Karl LICENSE.txtNOTICE.txtREADME.txt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
I need to respin anyway because the bits in the archives need to change, and thus all the signatures. The new bits also need to be voted on by the community. I was simply trying to short-circuit the process for editorial convergence on these three files. I will start a new vote thread for RC6 (which is the next RC) when: (a) the upload is complete (b) the ManifoldCF community has voted The RC6 candidate currently has no known issues, provided my sense is correct that the new LICENSE and NOTICE text are acceptable now. Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:24 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote: Hi Karl, For consistency and for the purposes of VOTE'ing on the bits at your RC URL that will actually get copied to Apache's distribution servers, I'd like to see you create another RC directory. You don't have to respin the RC code, just copy the current contents into a new directory with a new RC rev # and include your three updated text files in it from here. I would also like to see a new [VOTE] thread, like this: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 RC #N That way it's clear in mailing list threads how many +1s were attained, etc., without having to do a lot of detective work. Thanks for working the process. Trust me: it gets easier :) Once the above is done, I don't foresee any objections from me! Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Karl Wright wrote: I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and LICENSE.txt. Any further comments? Karl LICENSE.txtNOTICE.txtREADME.txt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
I'd be happy to provide it. Thanks, Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote: One other note: We probably should also see an SVN tag (or branch) URL in your release [VOTE] thread, so folks can also inspect the bits there. It's important to know what we're VOTE'ing on is consistent with what's in SVN. Honestly, as much as it would suck to spend another 2 hours of time, I'm wondering if it's just best to create another tag or branch in SVN and re-spin the release for consistency. Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 1:24 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: Hi Karl, For consistency and for the purposes of VOTE'ing on the bits at your RC URL that will actually get copied to Apache's distribution servers, I'd like to see you create another RC directory. You don't have to respin the RC code, just copy the current contents into a new directory with a new RC rev # and include your three updated text files in it from here. I would also like to see a new [VOTE] thread, like this: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 RC #N That way it's clear in mailing list threads how many +1s were attained, etc., without having to do a lot of detective work. Thanks for working the process. Trust me: it gets easier :) Once the above is done, I don't foresee any objections from me! Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Karl Wright wrote: I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and LICENSE.txt. Any further comments? Karl LICENSE.txtNOTICE.txtREADME.txt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
Thanks very much Karl. Great work! Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 1:32 PM, Karl Wright wrote: I'd be happy to provide it. Thanks, Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov wrote: One other note: We probably should also see an SVN tag (or branch) URL in your release [VOTE] thread, so folks can also inspect the bits there. It's important to know what we're VOTE'ing on is consistent with what's in SVN. Honestly, as much as it would suck to spend another 2 hours of time, I'm wondering if it's just best to create another tag or branch in SVN and re-spin the release for consistency. Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 1:24 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: Hi Karl, For consistency and for the purposes of VOTE'ing on the bits at your RC URL that will actually get copied to Apache's distribution servers, I'd like to see you create another RC directory. You don't have to respin the RC code, just copy the current contents into a new directory with a new RC rev # and include your three updated text files in it from here. I would also like to see a new [VOTE] thread, like this: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1 RC #N That way it's clear in mailing list threads how many +1s were attained, etc., without having to do a lot of detective work. Thanks for working the process. Trust me: it gets easier :) Once the above is done, I don't foresee any objections from me! Cheers, Chris On Jan 8, 2011, at 8:40 AM, Karl Wright wrote: I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and LICENSE.txt. Any further comments? Karl LICENSE.txtNOTICE.txtREADME.txt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org ++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
On 8 January 2011 16:40, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and LICENSE.txt. Any further comments? As previously mentioned, all the files appear to have leading blank lines. These should be removed. The README file says: Apache ManifoldCF is a multi-repository crawler framework, with multiple connectors, under incubation. This is insufficient as an incubation disclaimer. However I suggest the reference to incubation is removed, and a separate DISCLAIMER file created. See for example: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/empire-db/trunk/DISCLAIMER.txt Also, I think the NOTICEs at the end ot the README belong in the LICENSE file. == As an entirely separate issue, the README says that the project has to be built before use, and explains that one needs to download Java and Ant. If that is the case, why not include a download section in the build file which fetches all the dependencies? Or at least have an Ant target that copies the jar files to the correct directories, and update the binary package to include a single copy of each only. Karl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
(1) There already is a separate DISCLAIMER.txt. I have attached it for your consideration. (2) As discussed earlier, the LICENSE file already contains sections for HSQLDB and Jetty; the stuff added to the end of the README came from NOTICE files in those projects, and is not license material. (3) I don't know what download tool you have, but if you look in SVN you will note that there are indeed no blank lines at the start of any of the files. (4) Making yet another ant target will make a very complex build twice as complex. I don't think that is wise at this point. In short, I don't think there is any point in further changes. Thanks, Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 8:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 January 2011 16:40, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and LICENSE.txt. Any further comments? As previously mentioned, all the files appear to have leading blank lines. These should be removed. The README file says: Apache ManifoldCF is a multi-repository crawler framework, with multiple connectors, under incubation. This is insufficient as an incubation disclaimer. However I suggest the reference to incubation is removed, and a separate DISCLAIMER file created. See for example: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/empire-db/trunk/DISCLAIMER.txt Also, I think the NOTICEs at the end ot the README belong in the LICENSE file. == As an entirely separate issue, the README says that the project has to be built before use, and explains that one needs to download Java and Ant. If that is the case, why not include a download section in the build file which fetches all the dependencies? Or at least have an Ant target that copies the jar files to the correct directories, and update the binary package to include a single copy of each only. Karl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org # Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more # contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with # this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. # The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 # (the License); you may not use this file except in compliance with # the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at # # http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 # # Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software # distributed under the License is distributed on an AS IS BASIS, # WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. # See the License for the specific language governing permissions and # limitations under the License. Apache ManifoldCF (formerly Apache Connectors Framework) is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache Software Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Lucene PMC. Incubation is required of all newly accepted projects until a further review indicates that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process have stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects. While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the project has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache ManifoldCF 0.1
On 9 January 2011 02:33, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: (1) There already is a separate DISCLAIMER.txt. I have attached it for your consideration. OK. (2) As discussed earlier, the LICENSE file already contains sections for HSQLDB and Jetty; the stuff added to the end of the README came from NOTICE files in those projects, and is not license material. (3) I don't know what download tool you have, but if you look in SVN you will note that there are indeed no blank lines at the start of any of the files. Sorry, I was looking at the attachments in GoogleMail. Appears to be a bug in the View option, because they are OK when downloaded. (4) Making yet another ant target will make a very complex build twice as complex. I don't think that is wise at this point. I don't understand how one extra target can double the complexity. In short, I don't think there is any point in further changes. I still think the binary archive is unnecessarily bloated, and will cause wasted load and resources for mirrors and consumers. Thanks, Karl On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 8:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 January 2011 16:40, Karl Wright daddy...@gmail.com wrote: I've attached a new proposed version of README.txt, NOTICE.TXT, and LICENSE.txt. Any further comments? As previously mentioned, all the files appear to have leading blank lines. These should be removed. The README file says: Apache ManifoldCF is a multi-repository crawler framework, with multiple connectors, under incubation. This is insufficient as an incubation disclaimer. However I suggest the reference to incubation is removed, and a separate DISCLAIMER file created. See for example: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/empire-db/trunk/DISCLAIMER.txt Also, I think the NOTICEs at the end ot the README belong in the LICENSE file. == As an entirely separate issue, the README says that the project has to be built before use, and explains that one needs to download Java and Ant. If that is the case, why not include a download section in the build file which fetches all the dependencies? Or at least have an Ant target that copies the jar files to the correct directories, and update the binary package to include a single copy of each only. Karl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
