distributedlog-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release 0.4.0, release candidate #2
Date Tue, 24 Jan 2017 02:52:29 GMT
Ping?

If there is no other strong objections here, I'd like to conclude the votes
and proceed the remaining steps for the release.

- Sijie

On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Sijie Guo <sijie@apache.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Flavio Junqueira <fpj@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On 19 Jan 2017, at 18:42, Sijie Guo <sijie@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Flavio,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Sijie Guo <sijie@apache.org <mailto:
>> sijie@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jan 18, 2017 10:37 AM, "Sijie Guo" <sijie@apache.org <mailto:
>> sijie@apache.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jan 17, 2017 2:58 PM, "Flavio Junqueira" <fpj@apache.org <mailto:
>> fpj@apache.org>> wrote:
>> > +1, I have checked the following:
>> >
>> > - Built both 2.10 and 2.11 from source (skipped tests)
>> > - Checksums and signatures
>> > - NOTICE and LICENSE
>> > - Rat
>> >
>> > Questions:
>> > 1- I'm wondering if the text about Hadoop in NOTICE is necessary. How
>> did you guys end up including it?
>> >
>> > Ah, I need to check that. Can't remember why it was brought in right
>> now.
>> >
>> > I think this because we ported one class from Hadoop
>> "TestTimedOutTestsListener" - we used it for dump information when the
>> tests timed out. do you see any concerns here? what is your suggestion?
>>
>> I'm not particularly concerned, but I'm wondering if this is really
>> needed in NOTICE, simply because the guidance we have from ASF is that we
>> should change the NOTICE file only when strictly necessary. In particular,
>> this part:
>>
>> NOTICE is reserved for a certain subset of legally required notifications
>> which are not satisfied by either the text of LICENSE or the presence of
>> licensing information embedded within the bundled dependency. Aside from
>> Apache-licensed dependencies which supply NOTICE files of their own, it is
>> uncommon for a dependency to require additions to NOTICE.
>>
>> says that such changes aren't necessary for Apache-licensed dependencies,
>> but in this case, it is not really a dependency, you copied a file into
>> your code, so I'm not sure. Perhaps one of the other mentors have some
>> insight here.
>>
>
> Henry, Chris,
>
> Any thoughts about the NOTICE file here?
>
> Liang,
>
> Since you added the hadoop part in the NOTICE file, can you comment what
> was your experiences about the NOTICE file here?
>
> - Sijie
>
>
>>
>> >
>> > commit ea3c1143f9e2718d0d86e8b1c8f3a7e51ac19c4d
>> > Author: xieliang <xieliang007@gmail.com <mailto:xieliang007@gmail.com>>
>> > Date:   Wed Jan 4 16:09:01 2017 -0800
>> >
>> >     DL-165: Add TestTimedOutTestsListener to dump timed out cases
>> thread dump
>> >
>> >     Author: xieliang <xieliang007@gmail.com <mailto:
>> xieliang007@gmail.com>>
>> >
>> >     Reviewers: Leigh Stewart <lstewart@apache.org <mailto:
>> lstewart@apache.org>>
>> >
>> >     Closes #91 from xieliang/DL-165-TimedOutTestsListene
>> >
>> >
>> > 2- The tgz bundles do not include any jar directly, so there is no real
>> concern about bundling the bits from other projects that could require more
>> sections in the NOTICE file, is it right?
>> >
>> > I am clear about this part. Any principles to follow in Apache?
>> >
>> > Sorry typo => not clear about
>> >
>> > Can you comment more on this part?
>> >
>>
>> This comment is based on this:
>>
>> LICENSE and NOTICE must always be tailored to the content of the specific
>> distribution they reside within. Dependencies which are not included in the
>> distribution MUST NOT be added to LICENSE and NOTICE. As far as LICENSE and
>> NOTICE are concerned, only bundled bits matter.
>>
>> I didn't see anything specific that called my attention, and I'm doing
>> due diligence and asking.
>>
>> Both paragraphs I copied are from this page:
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
>>
>> -Flavio
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > -Flavio
>> >
>> > > On 17 Jan 2017, at 17:12, Leigh Stewart <lstewart@twitter.com.INVALID>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > +1
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Jon Derrick <
>> jonathan.derrickk@gmail.com <mailto:jonathan.derrickk@gmail.com>>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> +1
>> > >>
>> > >> LGTM. compiled the source packages and ran dbench. the license files
>> look
>> > >> good.
>> > >>
>> > >> - jd
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Sijie Guo <sijie@apache.org
>> <mailto:sijie@apache.org>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Hi all,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version
>> 0.4.0,
>> > >>> as follows:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> [ ] +1, Approve the release
>> > >>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific
>> comments)
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which
>> includes:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>    * JIRA release notes [1],
>> > >>>    * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
>> > >> dist.apache.org <http://dist.apache.org/>
>> > >>> [2],
>> > >>>    * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository
>> > >> [3][4],
>> > >>>    * source code tag "v0.4.0-incubating-RC1_2.11" (for scala 2.11)
>> and
>> > >>> "v0.4.0-incubating-RC1_2.10" (for scala 2.10) [5][6],
>> > >>>    * website pull request listing the release [7] and publishing
>> the API
>> > >>> reference manual.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> A simple instruction for validation the source and binary packages.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> - source package: building the package with "*mvn clean
>> apache-rat:check
>> > >>> package findbugs:check -DskipTests*"
>> > >>>
>> > >>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
>> majority
>> > >>> approval, with at least 3 PPMC affirmative votes.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Thanks,
>> > >>> Sijie
>> > >>>
>> > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa <
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa>?
>> > >>> projectId=12320620&version=12337980
>> > >>> [2]
>> > >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/distributed
>> log/0.4.0- <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/distribute
>> dlog/0.4.0->
>> > >>> incubating-RC2/
>> > >>> [3]
>> > >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ <
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/>
>> > >>> orgapachedistributedlog-1003/
>> > >>> [4]
>> > >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ <
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/>
>> > >>> orgapachedistributedlog-1004/
>> > >>> [5]
>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/tree/ <
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/tree/>
>> > >>> v0.4.0-incubating-RC1_2.11
>> > >>> [6]
>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/tree/ <
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/tree/>
>> > >>> v0.4.0-incubating-RC1_2.10
>> > >>> [7] https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/pull/109
<
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-distributedlog/pull/109>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> - jderrick
>> > >>
>>
>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message