Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:34 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 29 November 2011 22:25, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:30 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: But if the team already agrees that the changes need to be made, why not do so and re-roll? I'd just leave that up to the release manager to decide. There's no such thing as a perfect release (all non-trivial software has errors), so unless the fix is already available and the RM willing to do the extra effort I wouldn't stress too much about getting such non-critical changes in until the next release. I would question whether these NL errors are non-critical. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain says Every ASF release *must* comply with ASF licensing policy. This requirement is of utmost importance and an audit should be performed before any full release is created. In particular, every artifact distributed must contain appropriate LICENSE and NOTICE files. I read this as meaning that the NL files are (one of) the most important part(s) of a release. I agree they're important and we need to teach poddlings how to do them correctly and they must not be missing things that are included in the release, but i still say that having some unnecessary content in the LICENSE or NOTICE is not necessarily a blocker. No one is going to sue the ASF if a release includes a license or notice that it actually doesn't need, so its down to the poddling to decide if they want to respin to remove it. ...ant - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Monday, November 28, 2011, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: ... It is not a requirement that the NOTICE file be minimal. Let's worry about this for the 0.7.x or 0.8.0 release It think it *is* a requirement, according to http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice which specifically refers to *required* third-party notices. I agree that a non-minimal NOTICE might not warrant rejecting a podling release, but the next release should fix that. -Bertrand
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On 29 November 2011 16:37, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: On Monday, November 28, 2011, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: ... It is not a requirement that the NOTICE file be minimal. Let's worry about this for the 0.7.x or 0.8.0 release It think it *is* a requirement, according to http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice which specifically refers to *required* third-party notices. I agree that a non-minimal NOTICE might not warrant rejecting a podling release, but the next release should fix that. That surely depends on the reason why the NOTICE file must only contain required notices. Are there any consequences for downstream users if the file is incorrect? Are there any consequences for the ASF? -Bertrand - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Hi, On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: I agree that a non-minimal NOTICE might not warrant rejecting a podling release, but the next release should fix that. Agreed. For some background: Keeping the NOTICE file as lean as possible (given constraints from upstream licenses) is a great service to any downstream project that redistributes our releases. The simpler the NOTICE file is, the easier it is to meet the requirements of section 4 of ALv2. BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: On Monday, November 28, 2011, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: ... It is not a requirement that the NOTICE file be minimal. Let's worry about this for the 0.7.x or 0.8.0 release It think it *is* a requirement, according to http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice which specifically refers to *required* third-party notices. Yes - but what's required is a complex subject I agree that a non-minimal NOTICE might not warrant rejecting a podling release, but the next release should fix that. This is one of those areas that's difficult and time consuming for the legal team to get right in enough detail to allow simple fixes. Unless more volunteers step up to help, rejecting a release for minimality is likely to mean a lengthy delay. In general, better to note points for improvement and have the team fix them in trunk. Robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:52 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: Are there any consequences for downstream users if the file is incorrect? Are there any consequences for the ASF? Depends but potentially in some cases, yes. Robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Hi, On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 5:52 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: Are there any consequences for downstream users if the file is incorrect? To users no, to redistributors yes. Section 4 of ALv2 makes the attribution notices contained within the NOTICE file mandatory for any downstream distribution. Interpreting the excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works provision quickly becomes tricky if the NOTICE file isn't well maintained. For example, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMPRESS-72 for a case where I was having trouble tracking down whether certain attributions really were needed for a downstream redistribution I was working on. Are there any consequences for the ASF? Not that I know of, though IANAL. BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On 29 November 2011 16:59, Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: On Monday, November 28, 2011, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: ... It is not a requirement that the NOTICE file be minimal. Let's worry about this for the 0.7.x or 0.8.0 release It think it *is* a requirement, according to http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice which specifically refers to *required* third-party notices. Yes - but what's required is a complex subject I agree that a non-minimal NOTICE might not warrant rejecting a podling release, but the next release should fix that. This is one of those areas that's difficult and time consuming for the legal team to get right in enough detail to allow simple fixes. Unless more volunteers step up to help, rejecting a release for minimality is likely to mean a lengthy delay. In general, better to note points for improvement and have the team fix them in trunk. But if the team already agrees that the changes need to be made, why not do so and re-roll? Robert - 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: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On 11/29/2011 11:30 AM, sebb wrote: On 29 November 2011 16:59, Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: I agree that a non-minimal NOTICE might not warrant rejecting a podling release, but the next release should fix that. This is one of those areas that's difficult and time consuming for the legal team to get right in enough detail to allow simple fixes. Unless more volunteers step up to help, rejecting a release for minimality is likely to mean a lengthy delay. In general, better to note points for improvement and have the team fix them in trunk. But if the team already agrees that the changes need to be made, why not do so and re-roll? One shortcut that can be taken when a /single file/ must be changed (and as discussed on the list, that change already has consensus), would be to roll the next candidate on a shorter 24 approval clock, provided that everyone had full opportunity to review the candidate, and that rest of the package had already met with general approval. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
One shortcut that can be taken when a /single file/ must be changed (and as discussed on the list, that change already has consensus), would be to roll the next candidate on a shorter 24 approval clock, provided that everyone had full opportunity to review the candidate, and that rest of the package had already met with general approval. +1. Couldn't agree more. Thanks, Neha On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:38 AM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.netwrote: On 11/29/2011 11:30 AM, sebb wrote: On 29 November 2011 16:59, Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com** wrote: On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: I agree that a non-minimal NOTICE might not warrant rejecting a podling release, but the next release should fix that. This is one of those areas that's difficult and time consuming for the legal team to get right in enough detail to allow simple fixes. Unless more volunteers step up to help, rejecting a release for minimality is likely to mean a lengthy delay. In general, better to note points for improvement and have the team fix them in trunk. But if the team already agrees that the changes need to be made, why not do so and re-roll? One shortcut that can be taken when a /single file/ must be changed (and as discussed on the list, that change already has consensus), would be to roll the next candidate on a shorter 24 approval clock, provided that everyone had full opportunity to review the candidate, and that rest of the package had already met with general approval. --**--**- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.**apache.orggeneral-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.**orggeneral-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:38 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote: On 11/29/2011 11:30 AM, sebb wrote: On 29 November 2011 16:59, Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org wrote: I agree that a non-minimal NOTICE might not warrant rejecting a podling release, but the next release should fix that. This is one of those areas that's difficult and time consuming for the legal team to get right in enough detail to allow simple fixes. Unless more volunteers step up to help, rejecting a release for minimality is likely to mean a lengthy delay. In general, better to note points for improvement and have the team fix them in trunk. But if the team already agrees that the changes need to be made, why not do so and re-roll? +1 One shortcut that can be taken when a /single file/ must be changed (and as discussed on the list, that change already has consensus), would be to roll the next candidate on a shorter 24 approval clock, provided that everyone had full opportunity to review the candidate, and that rest of the package had already met with general approval. +1 Robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Hi, On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:30 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: But if the team already agrees that the changes need to be made, why not do so and re-roll? I'd just leave that up to the release manager to decide. There's no such thing as a perfect release (all non-trivial software has errors), so unless the fix is already available and the RM willing to do the extra effort I wouldn't stress too much about getting such non-critical changes in until the next release. le mieux est l'ennemi du bien --Voltaire BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: NOTICE file must be minimal (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On 29 November 2011 22:25, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:30 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: But if the team already agrees that the changes need to be made, why not do so and re-roll? I'd just leave that up to the release manager to decide. There's no such thing as a perfect release (all non-trivial software has errors), so unless the fix is already available and the RM willing to do the extra effort I wouldn't stress too much about getting such non-critical changes in until the next release. I would question whether these NL errors are non-critical. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what-must-every-release-contain says Every ASF release *must* comply with ASF licensing policy. This requirement is of utmost importance and an audit should be performed before any full release is created. In particular, every artifact distributed must contain appropriate LICENSE and NOTICE files. I read this as meaning that the NL files are (one of) the most important part(s) of a release. le mieux est l'ennemi du bien --Voltaire BR, Jukka Zitting - 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
