hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Please help with HBASE-14085
Date Tue, 04 Aug 2015 21:20:28 GMT
I'm not arguing that LEGAL-222 is a valid concern. I think we have a
concern of at least equal weight, which is every single releasable code
line is held up. We have blocked intention to make these release candidates:

0.98.14
1.0.2
1.1.2
1.2.0

That's everything users would find useful, excepting 0.94, but see below
regarding that code line.

I think it's fine to try and communicate LEGAL-222 is a blocker of this
magnitude and wait a bit longer.

If we don't have a response soon, however, I propose we resume releases,
providing only release source artifacts for the time being. We could
back-fill binary convenience artifacts at a later time should we have a
green light, if Maven/Nexus allows it. As a RM looking at how to get
0.98.14 and 1.0.2 out, I may simply do that soon and let the PMC judge the
wisdom of a source only release under these circumstances by way of the
usual release vote process.

I went back to look our archives with an eye toward what we would have to
pull if we are not allowed to redistribute the JRuby jar in convenience
binaries. We did not start splitting out source only artifacts until 0.95.
All releases 0.94.x and earlier ship as a single tarball. If you look at
http://archive.apache.org/dist/hbase/, every release effectively back to
the beginning of time is affected.


On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Source releases are fine, I think, since current guidance says that we can
> have a runtime dependency on works under the license. Only redistribution
> is in question AFAIK.
>
> I agree the situation is unsustainable, but I don't think it's any
> different then if we were making convenience binaries with bits under the
> Artistic license (aka "the terms as Perl itself"). While I'd love legal to
> be more responsive I suspect their response to requests for expedience
> would be "remove the questionable work".
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I think it's clear enough that we can make source only releases. Correct
> me
> > if I am wrong.
> >
> > It should be unacceptable that our releases are indefinitely blocked.
> This
> > is not a sustainable position.
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> > > For me, yes. the PMC duties say that we have to ensure things we
> release
> > > meet the foundation policies on licensing. That we were mistaken for a
> > long
> > > period of time is different than knowingly approving releases that
> don't
> > > meet the policy.
> > >
> > > I haven't seen much in the way of activity on either the ticket[1] or
> on
> > > the legal-discuss@asf public list[2]. Maybe a short note that makes
> > clear
> > > the PMC is blocking several releases due to the issue would help?
> > >
> > > [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-222
> > > [2]: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Andrew Purtell <
> andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > We have made many releases that include that fat JRuby jar. For
> years.
> > > > Would continuing releases until told otherwise be acceptable or
> > > > unacceptable?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Aug 4, 2015, at 1:16 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I've got a more maintianable version ready to go up today, but that
> > > won't
> > > > > help speed up LEGAL-222.
> > > > >
> > > > > anyone have some juice with the legal PMC or know a lawyer that is
> > > > willing
> > > > > to weigh in?
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Sean
> > > > >> On Aug 4, 2015 2:56 PM, "Andrew Purtell" <apurtell@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> All releases are blocked on HBASE-14085. Let's get it resolved
> this
> > > > week so
> > > > >> we can resume releases.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Best regards,
> > > > >>
> > > > >>   - Andy
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back.
-
> Piet
> > > Hein
> > > > >> (via Tom White)
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sean
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> >    - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sean
>



-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

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