harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [vote] Declare r991881 as 6.0 milestone 3
Date Wed, 08 Sep 2010 11:35:06 GMT
On 08/Sep/2010 10:31, sebb wrote:
> On 8 September 2010 08:52, Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> I have created signed source archives for revision r991881 of trunk and
>> made them available at:
>>  http://people.apache.org/~hindessm/milestones/6.0M3/
> The signing key has RSA key ID 8050390C.
> Although it is listed in public key servers, it is not listed in
>    http://www.apache.org/dist/harmony/KEYS
> which is where all keys are supposed to be obtained, according to:
>    http://harmony.apache.org/download.cgi#verify

yeah, I got a copy from SVN, but I see Mark has now updated the dist
copy too.

> ---
> The top-level NOTICE file contains the following text:
> ====
> The Apache Harmony Development Kit (HDK) contains a jar file from the
> Apache Derby Project for which the following notice applies:
> Apache Derby
> Copyright 2004-2007 The Apache Software Foundation
> This product includes software developed by
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
> ====
> I think this is superfluous, as the first few lines of the file should
> be enough to cover ASF code.

I don't follow your point here?  You think we should remove these lines,
specifically, but presumably keep in the required attributions following
that were passed through from our use of Derby, right?

> ---
> The top-level LICENSE file refers to Apache Yoko (incubation).
> Apache Yoko is no longer part of the incubator; it has been dissolved,
> and parts moved to Geronimo and CXF.
> So long as Harmony is using the Geronimo or CXF code, there should be
> no need to mention Yoko.
> I don't know what the procedure is if Harmony is using the Yoko code
> that remain in the Incubator; you should probably ask on
> Legal-discuss.

The code hasn't changed status, but I see there is a 1.1 release
available now so let's add a TODO to move up to that and pick it up from

> ---
> The following files don't have AL headers and are not listed in rat.excludes:
> classlib/doc/overview.html
> classlib/modules/imageio/src/test/java/META-INF/services/javax.imageio.spi.CorrectProviderConfiguration
> classlib/modules/imageio/src/test/java/META-INF/services/javax.imageio.spi.IncorrectProviderConfiguration
> debian/README.Debian
> debian/patches/01-ignore.suffix.on.samsa.tools.diff
> debian/rules
> drlvm/make/classlib.override.file.patterns
> drlvm/vm/thread/src/doxyfile
> ibm-v4/make/classlib.override.file.patterns
> Some of these files should probably have an AL header.

I'm quite comfortable that there is no ambiguity here, so nothing to be
concerned about.

Thanks for the review.


>> Please test these artifacts and then vote for declaring these source
>> archives as 6.0 Milestone 3.
>> This vote will be open for at least three days, or until all binding
>> votes have been cast (if earlier).
>> If the vote is successful, binary builds from these artifacts will be
>> made available on the download page in addition to these source
>> archives.
>> Regards,
>>  Mark.

View raw message