felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karl Pauls <karlpa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Karaf 1.4.0
Date Mon, 01 Mar 2010 09:53:10 GMT
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:55 AM, David Jencks <david_jencks@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 28, 2010, at 4:03 PM, Karl Pauls wrote:
>
>> -1
>>
>> I'm really sorry but it looks to me like:
>>
>> org/apache/felix/karaf/deployer/features/FeatureURLHandler.java
>> org/apache/felix/karaf/shell/commands/EchoAction.java
>
> Were these files in the first 1.4.0 release attempt? my rat scan didn't find
> them.

I don't know - didn't find the time to look into that one.

>>
>> are missing the license header and
>>
>> manual/pom.xml
>> client/dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>>
>> are missing a header as well. Furthermore,
>> org.apache.felix.karaf.deployer.spring and a lot of the other modules
>> have dependencies on spring-core which is not mentioned in the notice
>> nor in the overall src notice (its mentioned in the overall binary
>> notice).
>
> AFAIK the legal requirements and best practice is that LICENSE and NOTICE
> files are about what is actually in the artifact they are in, not anything
> that might be needed to use the artifact.  So unless a karaf artifact
> actually includes code copied from spring, the NOTICE files should not
> mention spring. Note that the maven-remote-resources-plugin includes a
> dependencies report in the jar that lists the dependencies and their
> licenses.  Does felix have a different policy?  If so, why?

We do have a different policy but we although have talks about
changing it. I guess, the main reason for including stuff in the
NOTICE was that historically, the maven-remote-resource-plugin didn't
work very well for us (nullpointers and other problems for a long
time). The important thing for me is to have a place where we give
credit where credit is due - if it is not he NOTICE we can make it a
different file but we probably should vote on that or something.

>> Other findings (not show-stoppers) are:
>>
>> Signatures and checksums work for me but for some reason there are not
>> only .asc but .asc.asc and .asc.md5/sha and .asc.asc.md5/sha files
>> around. Very strange (probably something wrong with nexus/maven - not
>> sure we can do something about it).
>
> AFAIK this is normal.

Well, it was normal to have .asc.md5/sha files but having
.asc.asc.md5/sha files? Again, not saying this is the fault of this
release but man, this is getting out of hand no?

>> Other than that, it looks to me like you are only building the jars
>> and the sources jars but not the bin and project artifacts we usually
>> do. Not a problem as such (as you still have the sources for each
>> artifact) but its somewhat different from what we do normally ...
>
> Is there a good reason for felix to do something other than the defaults
> from the apache 7 pom? (not that karaf is)

Well, I like that i can unzip a -project.zip and am able to build the
src inside of it. Having only the sources jars and the pom released
might be enough to match formal requirements but I'd prefer to have
something that builds without me assembling a project dir myself. This
is something that we did override from the apache 7 pom defaults
specifically because of this. Again, we can discuss whether it makes
sense or not but until now our releases created bin and project
artifacts.

regards,

Karl

> thanks
> david jencks
>
>>
>> Some artifacts are still using the osgi jars from felix (they should
>> switch to use the official org.osgi artifacts as soon as possible).
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Chris Custine <ccustine@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The Karaf 1.4.0 artifacts have been staged for release.
>>>
>>> These release artifacts contain updated copyright year in all NOTICE
>>> files
>>> and includes an updated RELEASE-NOTES file which was not updated in the
>>> previous release vote.  As requested by Richard, I have noted that the
>>> vote
>>> will be open for *at least* 72 hours in order to allow time for proper
>>> review.
>>>
>>> Release notes are here:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310100&styleName=Html&version=12314410
>>>
>>> Staging repository:
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachefelix-015/
>>>
>>> You can use this UNIX script to download the release and verify the
>>> signatures:
>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/felix/trunk/check_staged_release.sh
>>>
>>> Usage:
>>> sh check_staged_release.sh 015 /tmp/felix-staging
>>>
>>> Please vote to approve this release:
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Approve the release
>>> [ ] -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments)
>>>
>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Chris Custine
>>> FUSESource :: http://fusesource.com
>>> My Blog :: http://blog.organicelement.com
>>> Apache ServiceMix :: http://servicemix.apache.org
>>> Apache Felix :: http://felix.apache.org
>>> Apache Directory Server :: http://directory.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Karl Pauls
>> karlpauls@gmail.com
>
>



-- 
Karl Pauls
karlpauls@gmail.com

Mime
View raw message