Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Could someone help take a look at this? This should be pretty simple. We really want to proceed with the voting of the first release of Kafka. Thanks, Jun On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Neha Narkhede neha.narkh...@gmail.comwrote: Folks, Thanks for giving feedback on the LICENSE and NOTICE file issues. We've worked on the feedback and would appreciate if you could take a look and see if there are no red flags. Please find the LICENSE, NOTICE files and release artifacts for the next RC here - http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/kafka-0.7.0-incubating-candidate-8/ The relevant JIRA discussing these issues is here - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-221 If there are no red flags, we'll proceed with running a vote on kafka-users@and later on general@incubator. Thanks, Neha On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:12 PM, David Crossley cross...@apache.org wrote: At Forrest we have stacks of supporting products to manage. Each time that we decide to bundle a new one, we try to deal with its license and potential notices at the time. Read their LICENSE. If it has a required notice then comply by adding it to our NOTICE file. If it does not, then there is no mention in our NOTICE file. -David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Folks, Thanks for giving feedback on the LICENSE and NOTICE file issues. We've worked on the feedback and would appreciate if you could take a look and see if there are no red flags. Please find the LICENSE, NOTICE files and release artifacts for the next RC here - http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/kafka-0.7.0-incubating-candidate-8/ The relevant JIRA discussing these issues is here - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-221 If there are no red flags, we'll proceed with running a vote on kafka-users@and later on general@incubator. Thanks, Neha On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:12 PM, David Crossley cross...@apache.org wrote: At Forrest we have stacks of supporting products to manage. Each time that we decide to bundle a new one, we try to deal with its license and potential notices at the time. Read their LICENSE. If it has a required notice then comply by adding it to our NOTICE file. If it does not, then there is no mention in our NOTICE file. -David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
At Forrest we have stacks of supporting products to manage. Each time that we decide to bundle a new one, we try to deal with its license and potential notices at the time. Read their LICENSE. If it has a required notice then comply by adding it to our NOTICE file. If it does not, then there is no mention in our NOTICE file. -David - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Normally, when you ship the dependency together with your own product/project, then (AFAIK) that bigger work needs the NOTICE. If you don't ship it, let's say that you call it a System Requirement or Optional Plugin, then you don't need it. ALSO, more importantly, it looks like Voldemort depends on BDB Java Edition, which I think was discussed at length some years ago on legal-discuss@ but is not mentioned explicitly on http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html. I think the problem is that it seems to demand that all downstream users must ship source code, i.e. some odd form of virality. Even more reasons to check with the Legal committee... Cheers Niclas On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Niclas Hedhman nic...@hedhman.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: Personally I don't believe whirr is in error. Voldemort is under Apache 2.0 license, and as such falls under this: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices See paragraph 4.4 of Apache License ver 2.0. If Voldemort contains a NOTICE file, then it must be carried forward. If it doesn't, IMHO you should have an entry in NOTICE that says the work contains the Voldemort component. Hm, it does have a notice, it's pretty big/hairy: https://github.com/voldemort/voldemort/blob/master/NOTICE perhaps you can help me understand this a bit better, 4.4 addresses Derivative Works, which afaict whirr is not: 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. as whirr is merely linking to the interfaces of the work (whirr pulls in the jar file of/from voldemort) and not making any revision/annotation/modifications of the original. Am I not reading that right? (IANAL) I also notice in 4.4 where is says excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works. Given that whirr is only including a single jar - from voldemort itself, not jetty/junit/etc... would it not be correct to say that these other notices do not pertain to whirr's use? Thanks! Patrick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk I work here; http://tinyurl.com/6a2pl4j I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Ok, thanks for the feedback. I'll open a discussion for this on the whirr list/jira. Patrick On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Niclas Hedhman nic...@hedhman.org wrote: Normally, when you ship the dependency together with your own product/project, then (AFAIK) that bigger work needs the NOTICE. If you don't ship it, let's say that you call it a System Requirement or Optional Plugin, then you don't need it. ALSO, more importantly, it looks like Voldemort depends on BDB Java Edition, which I think was discussed at length some years ago on legal-discuss@ but is not mentioned explicitly on http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html. I think the problem is that it seems to demand that all downstream users must ship source code, i.e. some odd form of virality. Even more reasons to check with the Legal committee... Cheers Niclas On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Niclas Hedhman nic...@hedhman.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: Personally I don't believe whirr is in error. Voldemort is under Apache 2.0 license, and as such falls under this: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices See paragraph 4.4 of Apache License ver 2.0. If Voldemort contains a NOTICE file, then it must be carried forward. If it doesn't, IMHO you should have an entry in NOTICE that says the work contains the Voldemort component. Hm, it does have a notice, it's pretty big/hairy: https://github.com/voldemort/voldemort/blob/master/NOTICE perhaps you can help me understand this a bit better, 4.4 addresses Derivative Works, which afaict whirr is not: 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. as whirr is merely linking to the interfaces of the work (whirr pulls in the jar file of/from voldemort) and not making any revision/annotation/modifications of the original. Am I not reading that right? (IANAL) I also notice in 4.4 where is says excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works. Given that whirr is only including a single jar - from voldemort itself, not jetty/junit/etc... would it not be correct to say that these other notices do not pertain to whirr's use? Thanks! Patrick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/3xugrbk I work here; http://tinyurl.com/6a2pl4j I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug - 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: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Dec 5, 2011, at 9:45 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: Personally I don't believe whirr is in error. Voldemort is under Apache 2.0 license, and as such falls under this: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices See paragraph 4.4 of Apache License ver 2.0. If Voldemort contains a NOTICE file, then it must be carried forward. If it doesn't, IMHO you should have an entry in NOTICE that says the work contains the Voldemort component. Not IMHO… ;-) If a NOTICE file is absent, ALv2 does not require any action. Most projects, that I'm aware of, do not create attributions in the NOTICE for 3rd party artifacts that are not explicitly required by the 3rd party license. If the Voldemort project wants an attribution, they should create a NOTICE file. If an apache project wants to create an unnecessary attribution, I'd let them (i.e. I wouldn't -1 the release)… Some people may feel more strongly on this matter… IMO, this does not need to be policy. Rather, it's a decision a project can make on it's own… --kevan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote: On Dec 5, 2011, at 9:45 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: Personally I don't believe whirr is in error. Voldemort is under Apache 2.0 license, and as such falls under this: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices See paragraph 4.4 of Apache License ver 2.0. If Voldemort contains a NOTICE file, then it must be carried forward. If it doesn't, IMHO you should have an entry in NOTICE that says the work contains the Voldemort component. Not IMHO… ;-) If a NOTICE file is absent, ALv2 does not require any action. Most projects, that I'm aware of, do not create attributions in the NOTICE for 3rd party artifacts that are not explicitly required by the 3rd party license. If the Voldemort project wants an attribution, they should create a NOTICE file. If an apache project wants to create an unnecessary attribution, I'd let them (i.e. I wouldn't -1 the release)… Some people may feel more strongly on this matter… IMO, this does not need to be policy. Rather, it's a decision a project can make on it's own… Here's another one, say Apache TLP A includes works from Apache TLP B, is this (B) a third-party work or not? Are the parties in this case singular the ASF or the TLPs? Specifically, do I need to include the NOTICE file from B in the NOTICE file for A? Patrick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
I've opened a couple LEGAL jiras on this stuff to nail it down: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-118 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-119 Thanks all! Patrick On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote: On Dec 5, 2011, at 9:45 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: Personally I don't believe whirr is in error. Voldemort is under Apache 2.0 license, and as such falls under this: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices See paragraph 4.4 of Apache License ver 2.0. If Voldemort contains a NOTICE file, then it must be carried forward. If it doesn't, IMHO you should have an entry in NOTICE that says the work contains the Voldemort component. Not IMHO… ;-) If a NOTICE file is absent, ALv2 does not require any action. Most projects, that I'm aware of, do not create attributions in the NOTICE for 3rd party artifacts that are not explicitly required by the 3rd party license. If the Voldemort project wants an attribution, they should create a NOTICE file. If an apache project wants to create an unnecessary attribution, I'd let them (i.e. I wouldn't -1 the release)… Some people may feel more strongly on this matter… IMO, this does not need to be policy. Rather, it's a decision a project can make on it's own… Here's another one, say Apache TLP A includes works from Apache TLP B, is this (B) a third-party work or not? Are the parties in this case singular the ASF or the TLPs? Specifically, do I need to include the NOTICE file from B in the NOTICE file for A? Patrick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Dec 6, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: Here's another one, say Apache TLP A includes works from Apache TLP B, is this (B) a third-party work or not? Are the parties in this case singular the ASF or the TLPs? Specifically, do I need to include the NOTICE file from B in the NOTICE file for A? The parties are the ASF, not the TLPs. However, that doesn't mean you can completely ignore TLP B's NOTICE file. TLP B's NOTICE file should contain the notice information for TLP B followed by the required information for B's third-party works. TLP A's NOTICE does not need to (or should not) include the notice information for TLP B (we're all part of the ASF), but TLP A's NOTICE does need to include the third-party information from TLP B's NOTICE file. Concretely, assume this is TLP B's NOTICE: Apache B Copyright 2011 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). Portions of this software were developed by the Foo project at http://foo.org The portion of this NOTICE relevant to TLP A is the information about the Foo project. TLP A's NOTICE file need not mention TLP B, but does need to mention Foo (assuming your embedding of B includes Foo). If it's obvious that the Foo does not apply to your use of B (i.e. Foo is used for a C client that is not used by TLP A), then you need not mention Foo. Assuming Foo is relevant, A's NOTICE would be: Apache A Copyright 2011 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). Portions of this software were developed by the Foo project at http://foo.org --kevan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Thanks Kevan. On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote: On Dec 6, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: Here's another one, say Apache TLP A includes works from Apache TLP B, is this (B) a third-party work or not? Are the parties in this case singular the ASF or the TLPs? Specifically, do I need to include the NOTICE file from B in the NOTICE file for A? The parties are the ASF, not the TLPs. However, that doesn't mean you can completely ignore TLP B's NOTICE file. TLP B's NOTICE file should contain the notice information for TLP B followed by the required information for B's third-party works. TLP A's NOTICE does not need to (or should not) include the notice information for TLP B (we're all part of the ASF), but TLP A's NOTICE does need to include the third-party information from TLP B's NOTICE file. Concretely, assume this is TLP B's NOTICE: Apache B Copyright 2011 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). Portions of this software were developed by the Foo project at http://foo.org The portion of this NOTICE relevant to TLP A is the information about the Foo project. TLP A's NOTICE file need not mention TLP B, but does need to mention Foo (assuming your embedding of B includes Foo). If it's obvious that the Foo does not apply to your use of B (i.e. Foo is used for a C client that is not used by TLP A), then you need not mention Foo. Assuming Foo is relevant, A's NOTICE would be: Apache A Copyright 2011 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed by The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). Portions of this software were developed by the Foo project at http://foo.org --kevan - 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: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
There is a sample NOTICE file linked [1] from ASF Source Header and Copyright Notice Policy [2] [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-examplenotice [2] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice As someone trying to generate these documents, I'm actually finding these to be poor examples when trying to see what should and should not be in NOTICE. On http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice, under NOTICE file, there is The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required third-party notices. with a link to What Are Required Third-party Notices? However, this text doesn't talk about NOTICE, but LICENSE: Apache releases should contain a copy of each license, usually contained in the LICENSE document. And the httpd NOTICE doesn't provide many examples (there are only three non-Apache items listed). These don't answer questions such as: Do other Apache projects need to be listed in NOTICE as well (which was answered in the email exchange above, but as such won't of much use to the next Podling that comes along), or Do other Apache projects need to be noted in the LICENSE file (not answered here, that I can see), or How to include reference 3rd party jars in the LICENSE file that are also Apache 2.0 licensed? Casting about for an example more relevant, I come across Whirr's 0.4 release, which was +1'ed from Incubator and take a look at its NOTICE.txt (from http://people.apache.org/~asavu/whirr-0.4.0-incubating-candidate-2/): Apache Whirr Copyright 2010-2011 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed at The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). And then the jars that are included in the source distribution: ./services/cassandra/lib/apache-cassandra-0.7.0.jar ./services/cassandra/lib/libthrift-0.5.jar ./services/hadoop/lib/hadoop-test-0.20.3-SNAPSHOT.jar ./services/voldemort/lib/linkedin-voldemort-0.90.RC3.jar Voldemort was not developed at the ASF and isn't listed in NOTICE. This candidate was +1ed and released. Was this in error? Regardless, I've made an honest attempt to build the NOTICE and LICENSE files necessary for a source release based on bringing most of the jars in via Maven at KAFKA-221 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-221) and would very much appreciate a quick look at that to see if it's correct, before we call another vote. -Jakob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Jakob Homan jgho...@gmail.com wrote: There is a sample NOTICE file linked [1] from ASF Source Header and Copyright Notice Policy [2] [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-examplenotice [2] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice As someone trying to generate these documents, I'm actually finding these to be poor examples when trying to see what should and should not be in NOTICE. On http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice, under NOTICE file, there is The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required third-party notices. with a link to What Are Required Third-party Notices? However, this text doesn't talk about NOTICE, but LICENSE: Apache releases should contain a copy of each license, usually contained in the LICENSE document. And the httpd NOTICE doesn't provide many examples (there are only three non-Apache items listed). These don't answer questions such as: Do other Apache projects need to be listed in NOTICE as well (which was answered in the email exchange above, but as such won't of much use to the next Podling that comes along), or Do other Apache projects need to be noted in the LICENSE file (not answered here, that I can see), or How to include reference 3rd party jars in the LICENSE file that are also Apache 2.0 licensed? Casting about for an example more relevant, I come across Whirr's 0.4 release, which was +1'ed from Incubator and take a look at its NOTICE.txt (from http://people.apache.org/~asavu/whirr-0.4.0-incubating-candidate-2/): Apache Whirr Copyright 2010-2011 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed at The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). And then the jars that are included in the source distribution: ./services/cassandra/lib/apache-cassandra-0.7.0.jar ./services/cassandra/lib/libthrift-0.5.jar ./services/hadoop/lib/hadoop-test-0.20.3-SNAPSHOT.jar ./services/voldemort/lib/linkedin-voldemort-0.90.RC3.jar Voldemort was not developed at the ASF and isn't listed in NOTICE. This candidate was +1ed and released. Was this in error? Personally I don't believe whirr is in error. Voldemort is under Apache 2.0 license, and as such falls under this: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices Patrick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Niclas Hedhman nic...@hedhman.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Patrick Hunt ph...@apache.org wrote: Personally I don't believe whirr is in error. Voldemort is under Apache 2.0 license, and as such falls under this: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#required-third-party-notices See paragraph 4.4 of Apache License ver 2.0. If Voldemort contains a NOTICE file, then it must be carried forward. If it doesn't, IMHO you should have an entry in NOTICE that says the work contains the Voldemort component. Hm, it does have a notice, it's pretty big/hairy: https://github.com/voldemort/voldemort/blob/master/NOTICE perhaps you can help me understand this a bit better, 4.4 addresses Derivative Works, which afaict whirr is not: 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. as whirr is merely linking to the interfaces of the work (whirr pulls in the jar file of/from voldemort) and not making any revision/annotation/modifications of the original. Am I not reading that right? (IANAL) I also notice in 4.4 where is says excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works. Given that whirr is only including a single jar - from voldemort itself, not jetty/junit/etc... would it not be correct to say that these other notices do not pertain to whirr's use? Thanks! Patrick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Jun Rao jun...@gmail.com wrote: Does Apache has tools (like rat) to extract all the needed license? Digging out the license manually is both labour intensive and error prone. The rat community has started working on whisker[1] (and some other tools) but we really need more volunteers to step forward and start contributing to the development. Some other tools have also been seeded recently (eye and tentacles) but we need volunteers to step forward to document and polish them for a wider audience. Robert [1] http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/rat/whisker/trunk - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Hi, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Jakob Homan jgho...@gmail.com wrote: You appear to have generated your list of jars from looking at kafka-0.7.0-incubating.tar.gz, the binary distribution that has been built as a customary courtesy as part of the release attempt. This includes quite a few jars that are not included in the source tree since binary distributions do include transitive dependencies. Are you saying that entries need to be included in NOTICE and LICENSE for jars/dlls that are included in binary releases? Yes, see http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distribute-other-artifacts If properly tracking the licenses of all the dependencies included in such a composite artifact is too much effort, you can always *not* publish the artifact. Just leave it up to downstream users to compile it and thus have them take over responsibility of properly managing the licensing status in case they want to redistribute the resulting artifacts. A quick check shows that neither Hadoop, nor HBase. nor Whirr (recently with a an incubator release) do not do this. Then these projects have some work to do. Can you file issues with these projects referring the above link and this email thread? BR, Jukka Zitting - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On 2 December 2011 09:33, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Jakob Homan jgho...@gmail.com wrote: You appear to have generated your list of jars from looking at kafka-0.7.0-incubating.tar.gz, the binary distribution that has been built as a customary courtesy as part of the release attempt. This includes quite a few jars that are not included in the source tree since binary distributions do include transitive dependencies. Are you saying that entries need to be included in NOTICE and LICENSE for jars/dlls that are included in binary releases? Yes, see http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distribute-other-artifacts If properly tracking the licenses of all the dependencies included in such a composite artifact is too much effort, you can always *not* publish the artifact. Just leave it up to downstream users to compile it and thus have them take over responsibility of properly managing the licensing status in case they want to redistribute the resulting artifacts. Or publish the binary versions of our source only, and leave it to users to download the dependencies. It's vitally important that the users are made aware of the licensing requirements for everything we publish. A quick check shows that neither Hadoop, nor HBase. nor Whirr (recently with a an incubator release) do not do this. Then these projects have some work to do. Can you file issues with these projects referring the above link and this email thread? 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
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 10:55 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 December 2011 09:33, Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Jakob Homan jgho...@gmail.com wrote: You appear to have generated your list of jars from looking at kafka-0.7.0-incubating.tar.gz, the binary distribution that has been built as a customary courtesy as part of the release attempt. This includes quite a few jars that are not included in the source tree since binary distributions do include transitive dependencies. Are you saying that entries need to be included in NOTICE and LICENSE for jars/dlls that are included in binary releases? Yes, see http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distribute-other-artifacts If properly tracking the licenses of all the dependencies included in such a composite artifact is too much effort, you can always *not* publish the artifact. Just leave it up to downstream users to compile it and thus have them take over responsibility of properly managing the licensing status in case they want to redistribute the resulting artifacts. Or publish the binary versions of our source only, and leave it to users to download the dependencies. It's vitally important that the users are made aware of the licensing requirements for everything we publish. +1 Tracking licensing for applications composed from hundreds of components is non-trivial, and - without build support - is a *lot* of work. This is just one key service provided by a healthy downstream ecosystem. But unless consumers can download and get started, this ecosystem may be slow to grow. The approach - inspired by Lean and Continuous Delivery - we're trying over the James and Whisker is to extend the release pipeline. Separate concerns about the official release of source and components from those about assembling an official application from those component an the other dependencies required. Release first the source and components, and then work on an application release from those components. Robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Dec 2, 2011, at 3:51 PM, Jakob Homan wrote: So I hope it's clear why it's frustrating to have this rule suddenly pop up when it's apparently not enforced in the majority of cases (and then to be asked to go and open JIRAs for each of these projects on top of it). This requirement is fairly well documented, IMO. The incubator's release documentation is here -- http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html The LICENSE and NOTICE file requirements are documented here -- http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-license. I don't think this should come as a big surprise... OK. Some of that wording is too weak, IMO. All the licenses on all the files to be included within a package should be included in the LICENSE document. The should be is probably referring to a single LICENSE file as opposed to multiple license files in a license/ directory. I do understand that this is a frustrating process. You have code that's ready and want to release it. Many projects going through the incubator have gone through this same pain. However, it is important, IMO. I spend a fair amount of time on the Geronimo project. We have a lot of dependencies… http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/server/trunk/LICENSE We document source and binary licenses in a single LICENSE/NOTICE file. I have seen projects maintain separate LICENSE/NOTICE files for their source and binary distributions. To be honest, I'm not sure what form is preferred. I'd be happy to see either… --kevan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On 1 December 2011 06:16, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I notice that the NOTICE has this incomplete statement: This product includes the scala runtime and compiler (www.scala-lang.org) developed by EPFL, which includes the following license: There is not any following license. Nor should there be in the NOTICE file. I think the SCALA NOTICE should read This product includes the scala runtime and compiler (www.scala-lang.org) Copyright (c) 2002-2010 EPFL, Lausanne, unless otherwise specified. In my reading of it, that is all the license requires. This assumes that the product does indeed *include* the SCALA compiler. Otherwise the references must be removed from NOTICE and LICENSE. I also notice that the LICENSE file has copyright notices. I don't think that's a problem; they are often included in 3rd party licenses. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Neha Narkhede [mailto:neha.narkh...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 18:30 To: general@incubator.apache.org Cc: kafka-us...@incubator.apache.org Subject: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating) Hi, The Kafka community is hoping to get some feedback on the updated NOTICE and LICENSE files for Kafka, before we post a new vote for it. http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/NOTICE http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/LICENSE The previous vote thread or release artifacts are here - http://apache.markmail.org/message/hntuhwkbazwlfdoe?q=Kafka+list:org.apache.incubator.general We would appreciate it if you can please take the time to review this now, since we would like to ensure a smoother vote this time around. Thanks, Neha - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On 1 December 2011 02:29, Neha Narkhede neha.narkh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The Kafka community is hoping to get some feedback on the updated NOTICE and LICENSE files for Kafka, before we post a new vote for it. http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/NOTICE There are spurious === lines at the top of the file; these must be removed. http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/LICENSE All license for 3rd party products should be present in the LICENSE file. If the identical license is shared between several products, there's only need to add it once. Add a header line before the additional licenses to say what they are for. For example: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE For 3rd party products under AL 2.0, add a list at the end of the AL license text, before any other licenses. As it stands, either the NOTICE file is wrong, or the LICENSE file is wrong, because the NOTICE file should not mention 3rd party products that are not in the LICENSE file. And neither should mention code that is not actually included in the release artifacts. The previous vote thread or release artifacts are here - http://apache.markmail.org/message/hntuhwkbazwlfdoe?q=Kafka+list:org.apache.incubator.general We would appreciate it if you can please take the time to review this now, since we would like to ensure a smoother vote this time around. Thanks, Neha - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
As it stands, either the NOTICE file is wrong, or the LICENSE file is wrong, because the NOTICE file should not mention 3rd party products that are not in the LICENSE file. Thanks for the feedback! As I have already mentioned, we are tracking a bug to fix all non-blocker changes to the NOTICE file for the next release. I will include this feedback there. Correct me if I understood the long discussions on this list, but I don't think this blocks the current release. Add a header line before the additional licenses to say what they are for. We have the header for MIT and Nunit license. Didn't include it for the SCALA license for a project that is written in scala. Also didn't include it for the Apache license for an Apache incubator project. Hope that sounds reasonable. Thanks, Neha On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:43 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 1 December 2011 02:29, Neha Narkhede neha.narkh...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, The Kafka community is hoping to get some feedback on the updated NOTICE and LICENSE files for Kafka, before we post a new vote for it. http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/NOTICE There are spurious === lines at the top of the file; these must be removed. http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/LICENSE All license for 3rd party products should be present in the LICENSE file. If the identical license is shared between several products, there's only need to add it once. Add a header line before the additional licenses to say what they are for. For example: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE For 3rd party products under AL 2.0, add a list at the end of the AL license text, before any other licenses. As it stands, either the NOTICE file is wrong, or the LICENSE file is wrong, because the NOTICE file should not mention 3rd party products that are not in the LICENSE file. And neither should mention code that is not actually included in the release artifacts. The previous vote thread or release artifacts are here - http://apache.markmail.org/message/hntuhwkbazwlfdoe?q=Kafka+list:org.apache.incubator.general We would appreciate it if you can please take the time to review this now, since we would like to ensure a smoother vote this time around. Thanks, Neha - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Dec 1, 2011, at 12:55 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote: As it stands, either the NOTICE file is wrong, or the LICENSE file is wrong, because the NOTICE file should not mention 3rd party products that are not in the LICENSE file. Thanks for the feedback! As I have already mentioned, we are tracking a bug to fix all non-blocker changes to the NOTICE file for the next release. I will include this feedback there. Correct me if I understood the long discussions on this list, but I don't think this blocks the current release. My point would be that it's very likely that your LICENSE file is incorrect (i.e. it is missing necessary license information). So far, the only LICENSE file changes that have been made are the explicit issues that have been pointed out to you. I think the Kafka community needs to review all of their artifacts and make sure that their licenses/notices are accurately documented in the LICENSE (and NOTICE). I don't see any evidence that the community has attempted to do this. I think the artifacts that need to be reviewed are: ./clients/csharp/lib/nunit/2.5.9/nunit.framework.dll ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/avro-1.4.0.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/commons-logging-1.0.4.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/hadoop-0.20.2-core.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/jackson-core-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/jackson-mapper-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/pig-0.8.0-core.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/piggybank.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-codec-1.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-httpclient-3.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-logging-1.0.4.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/joda-time-1.6.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jopt-simple-3.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/log4j-1.2.15.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/target/scala_2.8.0/hadoop-consumer_2.8.0-0.7.0.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/avro-1.4.0.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/commons-logging-1.0.4.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/hadoop-0.20.2-core.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/jackson-core-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/jackson-mapper-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/pig-0.8.0-core.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/piggybank.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/ant-1.7.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/ant-launcher-1.7.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/asm-3.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/avro-1.4.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-lang-2.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jackson-core-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jackson-mapper-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jetty-6.1.22.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jetty-util-6.1.22.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jopt-simple-3.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/log4j-1.2.15.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/oro-2.0.8.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/paranamer-2.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/paranamer-ant-2.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/paranamer-generator-2.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/qdox-1.10.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/servlet-api-2.5-20081211.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/slf4j-api-1.5.11.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/velocity-1.6.4.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/target/scala_2.8.0/hadoop-producer_2.8.0-0.7.0.jar ./core/lib/zkclient-20110412.jar ./core/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jopt-simple-3.2.jar ./core/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/log4j-1.2.15.jar ./core/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/zookeeper-3.3.3.jar ./core/target/scala_2.8.0/kafka-0.7.0.jar ./examples/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jopt-simple-3.2.jar ./examples/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/log4j-1.2.15.jar ./examples/target/scala_2.8.0/kafka-java-examples-0.7.0.jar ./kafka-0.7.0.jar ./lib/apache-rat-0.8-SNAPSHOT.jar ./lib/sbt-launch.jar ./project/boot/scala-2.8.0/lib/scala-compiler.jar ./project/boot/scala-2.8.0/lib/scala-library.jar I took a quick look at some of these artifacts. I definitely see licenses missing from the LICENSE file. For example: paranamer-2.2.jar -- http://paranamer.codehaus.org/info/license.html sbt-launch.jar -- has 4 license files -- license, licenses/LICENSE_Scala, licenses/LICENSE_Apache, licenses/LICENSE_JLine (2 are missing from
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote: I took a quick look at some of these artifacts. I definitely see licenses missing from the LICENSE file. For example: paranamer-2.2.jar -- http://paranamer.codehaus.org/info/license.html The link you reference puts this jar in the public domain and no LICENSE update is required. sbt-launch.jar -- has 4 license files -- license, licenses/LICENSE_Scala, licenses/LICENSE_Apache, licenses/LICENSE_JLine (2 are missing from your LICENSE) hadoop -- has a unique license for the org.apache.hadoop.util.bloom.* classes. Thanks for pointing these out. I'm certain that no project with lots of dependencies updates its LICENSE every time it takes an update. One gets around this by downloading dependencies rather than distributing them? I don't know how many other problems there are… I'm sorry, but I don't have time to generate this information for you (nor should I need to). This is something the Kafka community needs to take on. Thanks for what you've offered. Many of the jars contain LICENSE files. Before spending hours crawling through every dependency, can someone point to the documentation requiring that the top-level LICENSE file contain the transitive closure of all code redistributed through the artifact? -C - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Does Apache has tools (like rat) to extract all the needed license? Digging out the license manually is both labour intensive and error prone. Thanks, Jun On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote: On Dec 1, 2011, at 12:55 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote: As it stands, either the NOTICE file is wrong, or the LICENSE file is wrong, because the NOTICE file should not mention 3rd party products that are not in the LICENSE file. Thanks for the feedback! As I have already mentioned, we are tracking a bug to fix all non-blocker changes to the NOTICE file for the next release. I will include this feedback there. Correct me if I understood the long discussions on this list, but I don't think this blocks the current release. My point would be that it's very likely that your LICENSE file is incorrect (i.e. it is missing necessary license information). So far, the only LICENSE file changes that have been made are the explicit issues that have been pointed out to you. I think the Kafka community needs to review all of their artifacts and make sure that their licenses/notices are accurately documented in the LICENSE (and NOTICE). I don't see any evidence that the community has attempted to do this. I think the artifacts that need to be reviewed are: ./clients/csharp/lib/nunit/2.5.9/nunit.framework.dll ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/avro-1.4.0.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/commons-logging-1.0.4.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/hadoop-0.20.2-core.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/jackson-core-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/jackson-mapper-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/pig-0.8.0-core.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib/piggybank.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-codec-1.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-httpclient-3.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-logging-1.0.4.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/joda-time-1.6.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jopt-simple-3.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/log4j-1.2.15.jar ./contrib/hadoop-consumer/target/scala_2.8.0/hadoop-consumer_2.8.0-0.7.0.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/avro-1.4.0.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/commons-logging-1.0.4.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/hadoop-0.20.2-core.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/jackson-core-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/jackson-mapper-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/pig-0.8.0-core.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib/piggybank.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/ant-1.7.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/ant-launcher-1.7.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/asm-3.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/avro-1.4.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-collections-3.2.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/commons-lang-2.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jackson-core-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jackson-mapper-asl-1.5.5.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jetty-6.1.22.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jetty-util-6.1.22.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jopt-simple-3.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/log4j-1.2.15.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/oro-2.0.8.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/paranamer-2.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/paranamer-ant-2.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/paranamer-generator-2.2.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/qdox-1.10.1.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/servlet-api-2.5-20081211.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/slf4j-api-1.5.11.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/velocity-1.6.4.jar ./contrib/hadoop-producer/target/scala_2.8.0/hadoop-producer_2.8.0-0.7.0.jar ./core/lib/zkclient-20110412.jar ./core/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jopt-simple-3.2.jar ./core/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/log4j-1.2.15.jar ./core/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/zookeeper-3.3.3.jar ./core/target/scala_2.8.0/kafka-0.7.0.jar ./examples/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/jopt-simple-3.2.jar ./examples/lib_managed/scala_2.8.0/compile/log4j-1.2.15.jar ./examples/target/scala_2.8.0/kafka-java-examples-0.7.0.jar ./kafka-0.7.0.jar ./lib/apache-rat-0.8-SNAPSHOT.jar ./lib/sbt-launch.jar ./project/boot/scala-2.8.0/lib/scala-compiler.jar ./project/boot/scala-2.8.0/lib/scala-library.jar I took a
Re: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
On 1 December 2011 21:58, Chris Douglas cdoug...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote: I took a quick look at some of these artifacts. I definitely see licenses missing from the LICENSE file. For example: paranamer-2.2.jar -- http://paranamer.codehaus.org/info/license.html The link you reference puts this jar in the public domain and no LICENSE update is required. It should still be listed for completeness, otherwise reviewers (and possibly users) will ask the same question again. sbt-launch.jar -- has 4 license files -- license, licenses/LICENSE_Scala, licenses/LICENSE_Apache, licenses/LICENSE_JLine (2 are missing from your LICENSE) hadoop -- has a unique license for the org.apache.hadoop.util.bloom.* classes. Thanks for pointing these out. I'm certain that no project with lots of dependencies updates its LICENSE every time it takes an update. One The Apache projects I know that include 3rd party jars do update the LICENSE ( NOTICE if reqd) file every time a new library is included in the distribution. It's really not difficult. Before deciding to use a 3rd party jar, the project needs to establish the license anyway, and check it is acceptable. All the required information is then to hand for updating the NL files. For podlings there is a catch-up, but again that must be done *before* a release is made, because a release must only include code under allowable licenses. gets around this by downloading dependencies rather than distributing them? Yes, that can eliminate some of the work. However, there are still some requirements for non-included dependencies. See http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html I don't know how many other problems there are… I'm sorry, but I don't have time to generate this information for you (nor should I need to). This is something the Kafka community needs to take on. Thanks for what you've offered. Many of the jars contain LICENSE files. Before spending hours crawling through every dependency, can someone point to the documentation requiring that the top-level LICENSE file contain the transitive closure of all code redistributed through the artifact? -C You only need to establish the license for direct dependencies, but they do need to be in the one file. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses The podling only has to do this once for each dependency. It may be tedious, but it is necessary, not least so that the end users (and the release reviewers!) have all the necessary details to hand. - 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: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Kevan- You appear to have generated your list of jars from looking at kafka-0.7.0-incubating.tar.gz, the binary distribution that has been built as a customary courtesy as part of the release attempt. This includes quite a few jars that are not included in the source tree since binary distributions do include transitive dependencies. Are you saying that entries need to be included in NOTICE and LICENSE for jars/dlls that are included in binary releases? A quick check shows that neither Hadoop, nor HBase. nor Whirr (recently with a an incubator release) do not do this. If the answer is yes, then it looks like everyone (from my quick sample) is out of compliance. If the answer is no, then it looks like the only libraries that need to be included are those that are checkedin/included-in-a-source release, which is on the order of 17, but can be decreased down to four or five if Hadoop is brought in via sbt/maven. Thanks, Jakob On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 4:33 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 1 December 2011 21:58, Chris Douglas cdoug...@apache.org wrote: On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Kevan Miller kevan.mil...@gmail.com wrote: I took a quick look at some of these artifacts. I definitely see licenses missing from the LICENSE file. For example: paranamer-2.2.jar -- http://paranamer.codehaus.org/info/license.html The link you reference puts this jar in the public domain and no LICENSE update is required. It should still be listed for completeness, otherwise reviewers (and possibly users) will ask the same question again. sbt-launch.jar -- has 4 license files -- license, licenses/LICENSE_Scala, licenses/LICENSE_Apache, licenses/LICENSE_JLine (2 are missing from your LICENSE) hadoop -- has a unique license for the org.apache.hadoop.util.bloom.* classes. Thanks for pointing these out. I'm certain that no project with lots of dependencies updates its LICENSE every time it takes an update. One The Apache projects I know that include 3rd party jars do update the LICENSE ( NOTICE if reqd) file every time a new library is included in the distribution. It's really not difficult. Before deciding to use a 3rd party jar, the project needs to establish the license anyway, and check it is acceptable. All the required information is then to hand for updating the NL files. For podlings there is a catch-up, but again that must be done *before* a release is made, because a release must only include code under allowable licenses. gets around this by downloading dependencies rather than distributing them? Yes, that can eliminate some of the work. However, there are still some requirements for non-included dependencies. See http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html I don't know how many other problems there are… I'm sorry, but I don't have time to generate this information for you (nor should I need to). This is something the Kafka community needs to take on. Thanks for what you've offered. Many of the jars contain LICENSE files. Before spending hours crawling through every dependency, can someone point to the documentation requiring that the top-level LICENSE file contain the transitive closure of all code redistributed through the artifact? -C You only need to establish the license for direct dependencies, but they do need to be in the one file. http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses The podling only has to do this once for each dependency. It may be tedious, but it is necessary, not least so that the end users (and the release reviewers!) have all the necessary details to hand. - 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: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
Also, we haven't ignored the fact that the NOTICE file must ideally be as short as possible. To track this issue, we've filed a bug - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-219 and will be fixing it for the next release. Thanks, Neha On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Neha Narkhede neha.narkh...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, The Kafka community is hoping to get some feedback on the updated NOTICE and LICENSE files for Kafka, before we post a new vote for it. http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/NOTICE http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/LICENSE The previous vote thread or release artifacts are here - http://apache.markmail.org/message/hntuhwkbazwlfdoe?q=Kafka+list:org.apache.incubator.general We would appreciate it if you can please take the time to review this now, since we would like to ensure a smoother vote this time around. Thanks, Neha
RE: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating)
I notice that the NOTICE has this incomplete statement: This product includes the scala runtime and compiler (www.scala-lang.org) developed by EPFL, which includes the following license: There is not any following license. I also notice that the LICENSE file has copyright notices. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Neha Narkhede [mailto:neha.narkh...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 18:30 To: general@incubator.apache.org Cc: kafka-us...@incubator.apache.org Subject: Feedback on updated NOTICE and LICENSE files (was: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating) Hi, The Kafka community is hoping to get some feedback on the updated NOTICE and LICENSE files for Kafka, before we post a new vote for it. http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/NOTICE http://people.apache.org/~nehanarkhede/LICENSE The previous vote thread or release artifacts are here - http://apache.markmail.org/message/hntuhwkbazwlfdoe?q=Kafka+list:org.apache.incubator.general We would appreciate it if you can please take the time to review this now, since we would like to ensure a smoother vote this time around. Thanks, Neha smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
