Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
On Nov 16, 2007 10:45 AM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bernd Fondermann ha scritto: > > what do we want to do about the stage directory? > > it is not included, but needs to be to build out-of-the-box. > > > > AFAIR, there are stil some concerns about licensing. > > we could exclude the related libs and include the others. > > We probably will have to remove some pom or create our own. > The same considerations I wrote about jSieve (before Robert noticed that > we could simply remove the "problematic" dependencies) are valid for server. +1 > As far as I can tell no action has been taken to fix the pom licensing > issue on the central maven repository. My last attempt to raise the > issue there failed. i think that the right approach would be to prepare a summary of the issue and the problems is causes us. when a new chair has been elected, the chair should present our issue to the legal team (yes, i know i'm on it but it's better to come from the project). it should also be included in our next board report. - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
Bernd Fondermann ha scritto: > what do we want to do about the stage directory? > it is not included, but needs to be to build out-of-the-box. > > AFAIR, there are stil some concerns about licensing. > we could exclude the related libs and include the others. We probably will have to remove some pom or create our own. The same considerations I wrote about jSieve (before Robert noticed that we could simply remove the "problematic" dependencies) are valid for server. As far as I can tell no action has been taken to fix the pom licensing issue on the central maven repository. My last attempt to raise the issue there failed. JARs present in the stage folder should be all redistributable, so the problem is limited to the pom licensing. As you can see many of them do not have a license header (all of them, probably) and while some of them have been clearly created by ASF members for the ASF and we can (safely) think they are ASLv2 there are many of them for which we don't know the licensing and we can't redistribute them. Stefano > Bernd > > On Nov 11, 2007 7:20 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Nov 6, 2007 1:21 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> if no one else jumps in soon, i'll go ahead and implement >> please take a look and check if i've missed anything >> >> - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
what do we want to do about the stage directory? it is not included, but needs to be to build out-of-the-box. AFAIR, there are stil some concerns about licensing. we could exclude the related libs and include the others. Bernd On Nov 11, 2007 7:20 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 6, 2007 1:21 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > if no one else jumps in soon, i'll go ahead and implement > > please take a look and check if i've missed anything > > - robert > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
On Nov 6, 2007 1:21 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > if no one else jumps in soon, i'll go ahead and implement please take a look and check if i've missed anything - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
if no one else jumps in soon, i'll go ahead and implement On Nov 5, 2007 6:06 PM, Serge Knystautas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/2/07, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > B) +1 > > +1 > > -- > Serge Knystautas > Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com > p. 301.656.5501 > e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
On 11/2/07, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > B) +1 +1 -- Serge Knystautas Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com p. 301.656.5501 e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
Am Donnerstag, den 01.11.2007, 20:00 + schrieb Robert Burrell Donkin: > On Oct 31, 2007 9:18 PM, Bernd Fondermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > > Bernd Fondermann wrote: > > > > > >> Building the source distribution from the nightly build fails. Both top > > >> level properties files are missing and a lot of java source files are > > >> missing, too. > > > > > >> Shouldn't we build the source distribution from root directory (parent > > >> of phoenix-deployment and all other modules)? > > > > > > Arguably, we shouldn't bother to distribute source for the nightlies. > > > Just > > > binary, and let people come to SVN for anything else. > > > > Fine with me. > > > > As soon as we want to release something, we would need to fix that anyway. > > I'll create a blocking JIRA. > > mea culpa > > i always create source distributions the old fashioned way: just clean > checkout the source then tar or zip manually > > i'll fix but i can either > > A) remove the source distribution build > or B) ensure the source build includes all modules > > opinions? > > - robert B) +1 bye Norman - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
On 11/1/07, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Oct 31, 2007 9:18 PM, Bernd Fondermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > > Bernd Fondermann wrote: > > > > > >> Building the source distribution from the nightly build fails. Both top > > >> level properties files are missing and a lot of java source files are > > >> missing, too. > > > > > >> Shouldn't we build the source distribution from root directory (parent > > >> of phoenix-deployment and all other modules)? > > > > > > Arguably, we shouldn't bother to distribute source for the nightlies. > > > Just > > > binary, and let people come to SVN for anything else. > > > > Fine with me. > > > > As soon as we want to release something, we would need to fix that anyway. > > I'll create a blocking JIRA. > > mea culpa > i always create source distributions the old fashioned way: just clean > checkout the source then tar or zip manually is this the equivalent to B) below? > i'll fix but i can either > > A) remove the source distribution build > or B) ensure the source build includes all modules > > opinions? I'd favor B) Let's just package up everything coming out of svn and leave out the artefacts created by the build. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
On Oct 31, 2007 9:18 PM, Bernd Fondermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > Bernd Fondermann wrote: > > > >> Building the source distribution from the nightly build fails. Both top > >> level properties files are missing and a lot of java source files are > >> missing, too. > > > >> Shouldn't we build the source distribution from root directory (parent > >> of phoenix-deployment and all other modules)? > > > > Arguably, we shouldn't bother to distribute source for the nightlies. Just > > binary, and let people come to SVN for anything else. > > Fine with me. > > As soon as we want to release something, we would need to fix that anyway. > I'll create a blocking JIRA. mea culpa i always create source distributions the old fashioned way: just clean checkout the source then tar or zip manually i'll fix but i can either A) remove the source distribution build or B) ensure the source build includes all modules opinions? - robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
Noel J. Bergman wrote: Bernd Fondermann wrote: Building the source distribution from the nightly build fails. Both top level properties files are missing and a lot of java source files are missing, too. Shouldn't we build the source distribution from root directory (parent of phoenix-deployment and all other modules)? Arguably, we shouldn't bother to distribute source for the nightlies. Just binary, and let people come to SVN for anything else. Fine with me. As soon as we want to release something, we would need to fix that anyway. I'll create a blocking JIRA. Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: source distribution 3.0 snapshot
Bernd Fondermann wrote: > Building the source distribution from the nightly build fails. Both top > level properties files are missing and a lot of java source files are > missing, too. > Shouldn't we build the source distribution from root directory (parent > of phoenix-deployment and all other modules)? Arguably, we shouldn't bother to distribute source for the nightlies. Just binary, and let people come to SVN for anything else. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
