hawq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ruilong Huo <r...@pivotal.io>
Subject Re: Layout of LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER files for Apache HAWQ 2.2.0.0-incubating rpm binary release
Date Mon, 22 May 2017 02:15:19 GMT
Hi Roman,

Please let us know if you get a chance to review this. Or someone else who
can help on this? Thanks.

Best regards,
Ruilong Huo

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:12 PM, Ruilong Huo <rhuo@pivotal.io> wrote:

> Hi Roman,
>
> Currently I am preparing LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER files for Apache
> HAWQ 2.2.0.0-incubating rpm binary release. The components of the binary
> package
> <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/hawq/2.2.0.0-incubating.RC2/apache-hawq-rpm-2.2.0.0-incubating.tar.gz>
> are as below:
>
> *> tar -xzvf apache-hawq-rpm-2.2.0.0-incubating.tar.gz; tree
> hawq_rpm_packages*
> hawq_rpm_packages
> ├── apache-hawq-2.2.0.0-el7.x86_64.rpm
> ├── apache-tomcat-7.0.62-el6.noarch.rpm
> ├── hawq-ranger-plugin-2.2.0.0-1.el7.centos.noarch.rpm
> ├── pxf-3.2.1.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm
> ├── pxf-hbase-3.2.1.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm
> ├── pxf-hdfs-3.2.1.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm
> ├── pxf-hive-3.2.1.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm
> ├── pxf-jdbc-3.2.1.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm
> ├── pxf-json-3.2.1.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm
> └── pxf-service-3.2.1.0-1.el6.noarch.rpm
>
> Given the LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER for Apache HAWQ source in top
> directory:
>
> *> tree incubator-hawq/*
> incubator-hawq/
> ├── DISCLAIMER
> ├── LICENSE
> └── NOTICE
>
> We plan to put LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER for binary release in a
> dedicated directory named dist which under top directory. Then these files
> will be copied to the rpm packages in packaging stage.
>
> Here are two options for the layout of the LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER
> for the components:
>
> *Option 1: Combine the licenses of all the components into one LICENSE,
> NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER respectively. For example:*
>
> *> cd $APACHE_HAWQ_TOP_DIR; tree dist*
> dist
> ├── DISCLAIMER
> ├── LICENSE
> └── NOTICE
>
> *Option 2: Keep the separated LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER for each of
> the components. For example:*
>
> *> cd $APACHE_HAWQ_TOP_DIR; tree dist/*
> dist/
> ├── hawq
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> ├── pxf
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> ├── pxf-hbase
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> ├── pxf-hdfs
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> ├── pxf-hive
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> ├── pxf-jdbc
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> ├── pxf-json
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> ├── pxf-service
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> ├── ranger-plugin
> │   ├── DISCLAIMER
> │   ├── LICENSE
> │   └── NOTICE
> └── tomcat
>     ├── DISCLAIMER
>     ├── LICENSE
>     └── NOTICE
>
> For option 1, it is easier to maintain the LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER
> files. However, it contains all the licenses for all the components. Thus
> it is hard to identify which component contains what licenses.
>
> For option 2, it needs extra maintenance effort. But, it is clear that
> what are the licenses for each of the components.
>
> Would you please share you comments and let us know which is better?
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Ruilong Huo
>

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