Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

First of all, one cannot "veto" a release, so a -1 vote on a release is not, really, a blocker. One can still do the release; but it does indicate a lack of consensus within the (P)PMC that the release is in a "releasable" state. > On Apr 1, 2018, at 7:19 PM, Abhishek Tiwari

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, > I reckon I'm a bit confused as well now as I'm not sure what is the correct > fix to apply…. In your case it quite simple see [1] Nothing needs to be added to NOTICE for MIT or BSD licensed software. You just need to remove the lines and copyright notices that refer to any software

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, In general just because a TLP does something doesn’t mean it’s in line with policy or may have historic reasons for it being that way. > Apache Hadoop: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/blob/trunk/NOTICE.txt > Apache Spark: https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE Have been

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

I reckon I'm a bit confused as well now as I'm not sure what is the correct fix to apply Is there any of the folks who voted -1 to propose some fixes? via pull request or a patch? the git repo is available here: https://github.com/apache/incubator-gobblin This will definitely helps a lot as

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Although the vote is over and successful, at this point I think I will just update the NOTICE file and bring in another RC for vote. However, I am puzzled that this improvement (not blocker) is attracting -1 votes. I would have expected +1 or 0 with improvement suggestion, specifically because I

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, It's hard to come up with a single simple sentence that applies in all cases. So when I said "if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs to be in LICENSE not NOTICE.” I’m wrong as it's not going to all cover all cases. For bundling Apache licensed (v2) bits of software

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

> On Apr 1, 2018, at 10:48 AM, sebb wrote: > > > I don't think that is true; I think bundled bits can affect the NOTICE > file (albeit perhaps rarely). That is my position as well, fwiw.

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

On 1 April 2018 at 15:29, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > >> On Apr 1, 2018, at 9:35 AM, sebb wrote: >> >> >> If bundled bits never affect the NOTICE file, why is there a concern >> about minimising the NOTICE contents? >> > > Let's consider the "touch points"

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

> On Apr 1, 2018, at 9:35 AM, sebb wrote: > > > If bundled bits never affect the NOTICE file, why is there a concern > about minimising the NOTICE contents? > Let's consider the "touch points" between what we release and the downstream user and consumer eco-system. For

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

I am also going to vote -1 for the same reason. It seems to me that simply fixing this issue is all that's required for a successful RC3 and GA. > On Mar 31, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > -1 binding as NOTICE should not contain copyrights of bundled

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

On 1 April 2018 at 14:15, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> I have not looked at the NOTICE file. > > Perhaps your should as my statements was in context to that. > >> "if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs to be >> in LICENSE not NOTICE." >> >> As

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, > I have not looked at the NOTICE file. Perhaps your should as my statements was in context to that. > "if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs to be > in LICENSE not NOTICE." > > As noted above, I don't think that is true. For what licenses do you think this is not

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

On 1 April 2018 at 13:28, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> non-bundled Dependencies are irrelevant to the contents of NOTICE and >> LICENSE. > > Yep 100% agree. > >> Though of course the license does affect whether it is allowed to be a >> dependency. > > Also agree. >

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, > non-bundled Dependencies are irrelevant to the contents of NOTICE and LICENSE. Yep 100% agree. > Though of course the license does affect whether it is allowed to be a > dependency. Also agree. > NOTICE and LICENSE are only for bits that are bundled in the release artifact. Yep 100% in

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

On 1 April 2018 at 09:21, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >> Can you elaborate a bit ? I checked the NOTICE file and it looks good to me. >> It mentions the included dependencies like bootstrap. > > Dependancies should not be mentioned in NOTICE. if something is bundled

[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi all, The vote for releasing Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 (incubating) is now closed. With a total of 4 +1 binding votes and one -1 vote, the vote passes. +1 votes: * Olivier Lamy * Matt Sicker * Jean-Baptiste Onofré * Romain Manni-Bucau -1 vote: * Justin Mclean Thank you everyone for taking the

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Thanks everyone for the feedback. Summarizing the thread: proposed changes to the NOTICE file is an improvement and thus we will consider it in the next release. At the moment, I will close the vote since we have run out of time and have the necessary votes. Thanks again, Abhishek On Sun, Apr

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

+1, not a blocker since it is more on nice to have helpers than needed tools IMHO and legally it looks ok and it builds properly Le 1 avr. 2018 10:42, "Olivier Lamy" a écrit : > Well not a big drama, we can fix that with the next release. > ATM 2 mentors have voted +1:

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Well not a big drama, we can fix that with the next release. ATM 2 mentors have voted +1: Jean-Baptiste and myself. 1 * IPMC with Matt. On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 at 18:36, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > PS by my count you only need one more +1 vote and only one of your

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Thanks for the update. It makes sense. Let's see what the other IPMC will say. Definitely something to fix for next release at least. Regards JB Le 1 avr. 2018 à 10:25, à 10:25, Justin Mclean a écrit: >Hi, > >> Yes but as said we can fix in next release cycle. It's

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, PS by my count you only need one more +1 vote and only one of your project mentors have voted. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, > Yes but as said we can fix in next release cycle. It's more an improvement > than a blocker IMHO. IMO it still warrants a -1, but that is not a veto or a blocker. Other IPMC members and the project mentors are free to vote however they want. If you get 3 +1 votes and more +1’s than -1’s

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, > Can you elaborate a bit ? I checked the NOTICE file and it looks good to me. > It mentions the included dependencies like bootstrap. Dependancies should not be mentioned in NOTICE. if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs to be in LICENSE not NOTICE. Thanks, Justin

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, > Can you please explain what is the legal problem with such content? It’s not a legal probably as such but an ASF policy one. The NOTICE need to be keep as small as possible as it has an affect on downstream projects. > TBH I can see so many similar content in a lot of TLP projects. You

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Yes but as said we can fix in next release cycle. It's more an improvement than a blocker IMHO. Regards JB Le 1 avr. 2018 à 10:10, à 10:10, Willem Jiang a écrit: >Hi Olivier > >NOTICE file is not supposed to include the copyright unless the License >requires. >As the

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi Olivier NOTICE file is not supposed to include the copyright unless the License requires. As the MIT License already has the copyright statement, we don't need to specify it in the NOTCE file. I just copy the Justin's comments from the lega issue discussion[1] , it can explain lots of thing.

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi Justin Can you elaborate a bit ? I checked the NOTICE file and it looks good to me. It mentions the included dependencies like bootstrap. Thanks Regards JB Le 1 avr. 2018 à 01:08, à 01:08, Justin Mclean a écrit: >Hi, > >-1 binding as NOTICE should not contain

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi the content is simply. " Apache Gobblin Copyright 2017-2018 The Apache Software Foundation This product includes software developed at The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). This product includes Bootstrap Copyright (c) 2011-2015 Twitter, Inc. This product includes

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi, -1 binding as NOTICE should not contain copyrights of bundled 3rd party software. The NOTICE file needs to only contain what is required (and not already in LICENSE) and needs to be as small as possible as it affects downstream projects. [2] I checked: - incubating in name - signatures

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

+1 (binding) Checked build, signatures & headers, DISCLAIMER, NOTICE and LICENSE. Regards JB Le 27 mars 2018 à 02:01, à 02:01, Abhishek Tiwari a écrit: >The Apache Gobblin community has voted on and approved the release of >Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 (incubating): >

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

+1 (binding) * Signatures ok * Rat check ok * Build and tests ok * Disclaimer, License, and Notice ok On 30 March 2018 at 05:57, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > I wonder if we could get some review/votes from other IPMCs? > We still need 2 more votes. > Thanks > Olivier > > > On

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

It's not a deal breaker IMO, just a difficulty in getting set up. On 27 March 2018 at 16:32, Abhishek Tiwari wrote: > Thanks Matt for pointing that out, good to know. I have created a Jira to > consider that option: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOBBLIN-449 > However, I

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Thanks Matt for pointing that out, good to know. I have created a Jira to consider that option: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOBBLIN-449 However, I am wondering if this is a deal breaker for the release? Or, can we use the current process that we have adopted since it works well for our

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Abhishek, what about using a bootstrap gradle task to download the jar and gradlew? DataFu does this [1], which was based on Samza's solution. You just need to have some version of gradle installed and can run `gradle -b bootstrap.gradle`. Then you don't need the jar or gradlew checked in.

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Yes, I understand that gradle-wrapper.jar is a convenience jar that helps get the gradle. However, we could not include it in the distribution because it is not acceptable to include binaries and instead we went with the proposed resolution in this thread:

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

I'd suggest not including gradlew and gradlew.bat in your source distribution then. You are aware that gradle-wrapper.jar is itself a bootstrap jar to get gradle itself, right? It's tiny and generally bundled with source code for convenience. As an aside, in order to regenerate the gradle wrapper

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

Hi Matt, Thanks for checking. We intentionally do not bundle gradle-wrapper.jar, and instead document the steps to obtain it and build. Please check the included README.md file. Regards, Abhishek On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > The bundled gradle

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

The bundled gradle wrapper in the source tgz doesn't work. It appears to be missing gradle/wrapper/gradle-wrapper.jar On 26 March 2018 at 19:01, Abhishek Tiwari wrote: > The Apache Gobblin community has voted on and approved the release of > Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 (incubating):

[VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

The Apache Gobblin community has voted on and approved the release of Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 (incubating): https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@gobblin.incubator.apache.org/msg01772.html Results: 5 binding +1 votes No 0 votes No -1 votes The feedback from previous release candidates has been