asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Till Westmann" <ti...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache AsterixDB 0.8.7-incubating (RC3)
Date Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:56:31 GMT
I think that the answer is “it depends”.
It should be clear that the download is not an ASF artifact.
If we provide that artifact from an apache.org address that’s more
difficult to communicate than if we provide it e.g. from a uci.edu
address.

Who are the end-users that download today?
Are they mostly students/researchers or is the audience wider than that?

Thanks,
Till

On 8 Oct 2015, at 13:48, Chris Hillery wrote:

> Could we continue to provide those binary artifacts as "unofficial"
> releases via our own website?
>
> Ceej
> aka Chris Hillery
> On Oct 8, 2015 1:40 PM, "Ian Maxon" <imaxon@uci.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hm, alright, if that's something that seems valuable, then I'm OK 
>> with it.
>> I suppose my eyes were set on getting the asterix-installer and
>> asterix-yarn packagings out, since that's usually what end-users are
>> downloading first. It is true that this has taken a lot longer than I 
>> think
>> anyone would've liked.
>>
>> -Ian
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Chris Hillery <chillery@hillery.land>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> That sounds like a reasonable idea to me. If Ate is right that this
>> usually
>>> takes several releases to get correct, it could be a really long 
>>> time
>>> before we have binaries fully ready to go. This release has already 
>>> taken
>>> months longer than expected; let's have a source-only release for 
>>> now so
>> we
>>> can continue moving forward.
>>>
>>> Ceej
>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>> On Oct 8, 2015 1:15 PM, "Till Westmann" <tillw@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Would it also be an option to
>>>> a) release the current release in source-only form,
>>>> b) not advertise/distribute the binaries for now, and
>>>> c) fix this for the next release?
>>>>
>>>> Right now we have zero AsterixDB releases at the ASF and that way
>>>> we could have one that people have to build on their own (which is
>>>> the usual way at the ASF and no rocket science for any developer).
>>>> Also, I think that individual developer can still build a binary 
>>>> and
>>>> give it to someone for testing, it’s just not an ASF artifact at
>>>> that point.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts/Concerns?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Till
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7 Oct 2015, at 15:49, Ian Maxon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I see, thank you for the very detailed analysis Ate. I think we 
>>>> will
>> have
>>>>> to fix all of the binary assemblies to conform.  What's in Maven 
>>>>> is
>>>>> important, as well as the bundled zips and such. Our usual method 
>>>>> of
>>>>> distribution to end-users is via those bundled zips, rather than
>> source.
>>>>> In
>>>>> fact we actually had to add the source assembly specifically for
>> voting,
>>>>> typically developers or folks who need special patches simply 
>>>>> check
>> out
>>>>> from git.
>>>>> More info/updates to come as I dig into how to coax maven into 
>>>>> doing
>>> this
>>>>> nicely...
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks again,
>>>>> -Ian
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 3:24 PM, Ate Douma <ate@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi team,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I either can +1 or -1 this release candidate, depending on if the
>>> staged
>>>>>> maven repository provided artifacts are also intended to be
>>>>>> distributed...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For just the source release (like for the Hyracks release), I 
>>>>>> think
>> it
>>> is
>>>>>> good to go, so +1 for that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But for the binary artifacts in the Maven repo, it is definitely

>>>>>> a
>> -1.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So either you'll drop/skip releasing to the Maven repo for this 
>>>>>> time,
>>> and
>>>>>> then you might be good (pending possible feedback from others), 
>>>>>> or
>> this
>>>>>> vote better be cancelled and prepare for a lot of work to get 
>>>>>> this
>>> fixed
>>>>>> first...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I already mentioned on the Hyracks release candidate: LICENSE,
>>> NOTICE
>>>>>> and DISCLAIMER requirements apply to all released/distributed
>>> artifacts.
>>>>>> As such, all the build artifacts in the Maven repository also 
>>>>>> have to
>>>>>> contain and provide these...
>>>>>> Please check again the requirements for binary (re)distributions
>> here:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundled-vs-non-bundled
>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#deps-of-deps
>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And in general everything on whole page.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some of the Maven repo jars already do have the 'verbatim' Apache
>>> LICENSE
>>>>>> and NOTICE files, but none provide the Incubator DISCLAIMER, 
>>>>>> which in
>>>>>> addition to the above rules also is required for every 
>>>>>> distribution
>>> from
>>>>>> the Incubator.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And some others jars don't even bundle a LICENSE and NOTICE file

>>>>>> like
>>>>>> asterix-common-0.8.7-incubating.jar (there are possibly more, I
>> didn't
>>>>>> check each and every one).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And besides this, aggregating distributions like all .zip|.tar 
>>>>>> etc.
>>> files
>>>>>> contain none of these files. Including module -source-release.zip
>> files
>>>>>> like asterix-events-0.8.7-incubating-source-release.zip and the
>>> -demo.zip
>>>>>> files.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All of these artifacts when released/distributed have to comply 
>>>>>> to
>> the
>>>>>> above rules.
>>>>>> Which most definitely isn't a trivial task to comply with and
>> typically
>>>>>> takes several iterations to get right... Painful yes, but 
>>>>>> necessary.
>>>>>> Once setup and configured properly though, thereafter it usually
>>> doesn't
>>>>>> require a lot of work to keep it up to date.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But getting it right the first time will.
>>>>>> Just saying so that you'll all be aware this isn't something 
>>>>>> likely
>>>>>> fixable in a few minutes or even hours...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Two important things to keep in mind:
>>>>>> - LICENSE and NOTICE files must be tailored specifically to the
>>>>>> distribution containing them, providing attribution to what the
>>>>>> distribution contains, but nothing more.
>>>>>> For example 3rd party embedded sources like JQuery require 
>>>>>> license
>>>>>> attribution, but NOT in artifacts NOT embedding them.
>>>>>> So the asterix-app should indeed mention this in the LICENSE file

>>>>>> in
>>> its
>>>>>> jar AND -binary-assembly.zip, but for example the asterix-algebra

>>>>>> jar
>>>>>> should NOT.
>>>>>> - Distributions bundling other distributions must aggregate 
>>>>>> possible
>>>>>> LICENSE and NOTICE attributions of those other distributions 
>>>>>> within
>>> their
>>>>>> main LICENSE and NOTICE file.
>>>>>> So for example, the LICENSE and NOTICE files in the asterix-app
>>>>>> binary-assembly.zip must aggregate those from the 
>>>>>> bundled/embedded
>>>>>> asterix-app *jar*.
>>>>>> And further more, as the binary-assembly.zip bundles many other,
>>>>>> including 3rd party, jars, their LICENSE and/or NOTICE 
>>>>>> attributions
>>> needs
>>>>>> to be aggregated as well (when needed, which depends on the
>> particular
>>>>>> LICENSE and/or NOTICE). Including possible other licenses 
>>>>>> applicable
>> to
>>>>>> those bundled jars (or whatever bundled bits).
>>>>>> And for aggregates of aggregates, like the asterix-installer
>>>>>> binary-assembly.zip, this has to be done 'transitively'. Yeah, a

>>>>>> lot
>> of
>>>>>> work indeed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also like to refer back to the [DISCUSS] mail I send earlier on

>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Hyracks release candidate, where I already indicated this to 
>>>>>> become
>>>>>> critical when releasing binary artifacts.
>>>>>> And to a few suggestions I gave then like configuring the
>>>>>> apache-incubator-disclaimer-resource-bundle to ensure the 
>>>>>> DISCLAIMER
>>> file
>>>>>> will automatically added to all generated jars (but not in 
>>>>>> assembled
>>>>>> artifacts).
>>>>>> And to leverage automatic *appending* specific LICENSE/NOTICE 
>>>>>> file
>>>>>> fragments for specific modules which embed 3rd party resources, 
>>>>>> via
>>>>>> src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/LICENSE and/or ./NOTICE 
>>>>>> files.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm happy to try help out if this raises questions (and I expect

>>>>>> it
>>>>>> will),
>>>>>> but that'll be more practical to do case by case.
>>>>>> Trying to write down such 'guidelines' generically typically just
>> leads
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> more confusion :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>> Ate
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2015-10-05 22:16, Ian Maxon wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please verify and vote on the first full Apache AsterixDB 
>>>>>>> release!
>>>>>>> This candidate addresses some of the differences that were 
>>>>>>> noticed
>>>>>>> between the tagged commit in git and the source packaging.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The tag to be voted on is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> asterix-0.8.7-incubating
>>>>>>> commit : d2e1e89cfdf39e2b772dff2600913bb79644a380
>>>>>>> link:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-asterixdb.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/asterix-0.8.7-incubating
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The artifacts, md5s, and signatures are at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/asterixdb/asterix-0.8.7-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/asterixdb/asterix-0.8.7-incubating-source-release.zip.asc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/asterixdb/asterix-0.8.7-incubating-source-release.zip.md5
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/asterixdb/asterix-0.8.7-incubating-source-release.zip.sha1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MD5: 7330e6d6c2dd691ae3ab6a641e4d5344
>>>>>>> SHA1: bf0b4a2ceaa26bcf1fcda33fee1ba227e31a88ba
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Additionally, a staged maven repository is available at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheasterix-1014/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The KEYS file containing the PGP keys used to sign the release

>>>>>>> can
>> be
>>>>>>> found at
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/asterixdb/KEYS
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> RAT was executed as part of Maven via the RAT maven plugin, as

>>>>>>> well
>> as
>>>>>>> manually, but it
>>>>>>> excludes the following paths:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .*\.adm
>>>>>>> .*\.aql
>>>>>>> .*\.cleaned
>>>>>>> .*\.csv
>>>>>>> .*\.csv.cr
>>>>>>> .*\.csv.crlf
>>>>>>> .*\.csv.lf
>>>>>>> .*\.ddl
>>>>>>> .*\.dot
>>>>>>> .*\.hcli
>>>>>>> .*\.iml
>>>>>>> .*\.json
>>>>>>> .*\.out
>>>>>>> .*\.plan
>>>>>>> .*\.ps
>>>>>>> .*\.scm
>>>>>>> .*\.tbl
>>>>>>> .*\.tbl\.big
>>>>>>> .*\.tsv
>>>>>>> .*\.txt
>>>>>>> .*large_text
>>>>>>> .*part-00000
>>>>>>> .*part-00001
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .*\.goutputstream-YQMB2V
>>>>>>> .*02-fuzzy-select
>>>>>>> .*LockRequestFile
>>>>>>> .*hosts
>>>>>>> .*id_rsa
>>>>>>> .*known_hosts
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> .*bottle.py
>>>>>>> .*geostats.js
>>>>>>> .*jquery.autosize-min.js
>>>>>>> .*jquery.min.js
>>>>>>> .*rainbowvis.js
>>>>>>> .*smoothie.js
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These files either are either data for tests, procedurally
>> generated,
>>>>>>> or source files which come without a header mentioning their
>> license,
>>>>>>> but have an explicit reference in the LICENSE file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The complete RAT report is available at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>> https://gist.githubusercontent.com/westmann/b6ed4b25bea44adcd526/raw/be93ff0c1d13c2ce7c88a2b713ace130b5e7ef5f/gistfile1.txt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote is open for 72 hours, or until the necessary number
of
>> votes
>>>>>>> (3 +1) has been reached.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please vote
>>>>>>> [ ] +1 release this package as Apache AsterixDB 0.8.7-incubating
>>>>>>> [ ] 0 No strong feeling either way
>>>>>>> [ ] -1 do not release this package because ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>> -Ian
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>

Mime
View raw message