htrace-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Billie Rinaldi <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] htrace-3.1.0, fifth release candidate
Date Mon, 05 Jan 2015 17:27:01 GMT
I have 796e2438fafac3510938c1f987fadd27eef6c063, but it doesn't appear to
be tagged.  Maybe the tag still needs to be pushed or something?
Regarding the binary files, I don't think they can be included in a
src-only tarball.

Going down the release checklist (, it
looks as though we're okay on most of the points, but we're missing the
disclaimer, the filenames don't have "incubating" in them (I've seen other
podlings handle this by adding -incubating to the version number, e.g.
3.1.0-incubating), and the release doesn't consist only of source code.
good - 1.1 Checksums and PGP signatures are valid.
good - 2.1 Build is successful including automated tests.
still need to address - 3.1 DISCLAIMER is correct, filenames include
see below - 3.2 Top-level LICENSE and NOTICE are correct for each
good - 3.3 All source files have license headers where appropriate.
good - 3.4 The provenance of all source files is clear (ASF or software
good - 3.5 Dependencies licenses are ok as per
release contains compiled code - 3.6 Release consists of source code only,
no binaries.

Regarding the LICENSE and NOTICE, in htrace-hbase/src/main/webapps/static
we have d3.min.js, bootstrap-theme.min.css and bootstrap.min.css.  d3 is
BSD-licensed and bootstrap is MIT-licensed, so these should be mentioned in
the LICENSE file, presumably with the entire text of their licenses since
we're using the minimized versions (

In htrace-zipkin/src/main/thrift we have scribe.thrift and
zipkinCore.thrift that seem to be from Zipkin.  Since Zipkin is
Apache-licensed and has a NOTICE file, I think we need to copy the first
couple of lines to our NOTICE (e.g. Zipkin is a distributed tracing system.
Copyright 2012 Twitter, Inc. -- we can leave out the optional dependencies
listed in their NOTICE).

Regarding the projects currently mentioned in the NOTICE file:
junit - we don't actually bundle this, do we? can we remove it from the
levigo and kingpin - MIT licensed, so should be mentioned in LICENSE
instead of NOTICE
units - I'm a little concerned about this one since the license is
undetermined -- what if it's made GPL?

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Stack <> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Billie Rinaldi <> wrote:
> > Sorry for the delay; I'm just getting back from vacation and am taking a
> > look now.  Do we have a KEYS file?
> No. Was thinking this a TODO for when we move RC to release.
> >   Is there a tag for the release
> >
> Yes (Pull down tags to your local repo and see its tagged 3.1.0RC4 at
> 796e2438fafac3510938c1f987fadd27eef6c063 We made a 3.1 branch soon after).
> > candidate?  The tarball doesn't quite match what is in git, so how is the
> > tarball created from the tag?
> Checkout the tag and then do:
> $ mvn clean install assembly:single
> I'll write up how-to-RC soon.
> > Also are the binary files in
> > htrace-core/src/go/bin intended to be in the tarball?  I'll check over
> the
> > license and notice information as well.
> >
> >
> Yes. They are there right?
> Thanks Billie,
> St.Ack

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