ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anton Vinogradov <avinogra...@gridgain.com>
Subject Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.2.0 release (RC2)
Date Wed, 01 Jul 2015 19:49:11 GMT
Cos,
correct me if I'm wrong,
We able to make any "convenience binaries", with any license type of
included dependencies, for example (l)gpl, and upload them to Ignite site,
but each "convenience binary" must contain proper LICENSE and NOTICE files.

On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 11:42AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:44AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > > > > GridGain community edition is not governed by Apache should have
> LGPL
> > > > > turned on.
> > > > >
> > > > > The LGPL profile in Maven should be turned on by default because
> our
> > > > users
> > > > > should build with LGPL libraries included. However, the Apache
> Ignite
> > > > > binary release should have LGPL turned off, as users can download
> it
> > > >
> > > > There's no such thing as Apache binary release: ASF releases only
> > source
> > > > code.
> > >
> > > Cos, of course we know this. How should we call the Apache Ignite
> binary
> > > release on the Apache Ignite website?
> >
> > As has been discussed a numerous times, these are "convenience binaries"
> > not a
> > binary release. The latter will be frown upon by IPMC (again).
> >
>
> We call them correctly on the website. I will make sure to call them
> "convenience" binaries in the dev list communication as well.
>
>
> >
> > Cos
> >
> > > > Cos
> > > >
> > > > > directly from the Apache Ignite website directly.
> > > > >
> > > > > D.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Anton Vinogradov <
> > > > avinogradov@gridgain.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Also,
> > > > > > Currently lgpl profile is turned on during Ignite Fabric Release
> > build
> > > > and
> > > > > > as a result distribution contain lgpl artifacts.
> > > > > > Should we build Igrite releases without lgpl profile in future?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is it legal to build GridGain Community Edition with lgpl profile
> > > > turned
> > > > > > on?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Anton Vinogradov <
> > > > avinogradov@gridgain.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > > As Justin said we have dependency on javax.servlet-api-3.0.1
> > (CDDL +
> > > > > > > GPLv2). As far as I understang we can not ptovide this
artifact
> > as a
> > > > part
> > > > > > > of Ignite binary distribution.
> > > > > > > But I found that Apache Tomcat have same (javax.servlet.*)
> > classes
> > > > under
> > > > > > > Apache licence (for example -
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/tomcat/blob/trunk/java/javax/servlet/AsyncContext.java
> > > > > > > ).
> > > > > > > Is there any chances to use these classes at Ignite?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <
> > cos@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> We have a nighly build going on builds.apache.org.
It should
> be
> > > > easy to
> > > > > > >> add
> > > > > > >> one to do the release's convenience binaries there
as well.
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Cos
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 07:18PM, Branko ─îibej wrote:
> > > > > > >> > On 26.06.2015 14:52, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > Brane, mvn clean package does this. The process
is covered
> > in
> > > > > > >> DEVNOTES.txt
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Is that what you ask about?
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > No, I'm asking where (on which machine) this is
done.
> Ideally,
> > > > these
> > > > > > >> > convenience binaries should be build on controlled
ASF
> > > > infrastructure,
> > > > > > >> > not on some random (possibly infected) developer's
laptop.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > -- Brane
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > 2015-06-26 9:33 GMT+03:00 Branko ─îibej <brane@apache.org
> >:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > >> On 22.06.2015 12:20, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >>> Guys,
> > > > > > >> > >>>
> > > > > > >> > >>> ignite-1.2.0-incubating-rc2 has been
accepted with 7
> > votes (2
> > > > > > >> binding).
> > > > > > >> > >>> Thanks to those who voted:
> > > > > > >> > >>>
> > > > > > >> > >>>    - Gianfranco
> > > > > > >> > >>>    - Sergi
> > > > > > >> > >>>    - Branko (binding)
> > > > > > >> > >>>    - Alexey Goncharuk
> > > > > > >> > >>>    - Valentin
> > > > > > >> > >>>    - Semyon
> > > > > > >> > >>>    - Konstantin Boudnik (binding)
> > > > > > >> > >>>
> > > > > > >> > >>> I will start vote on general list
shortly.
> > > > > > >> > >> By the way, and before we get hammered
about this on
> > general@:
> > > > > > >> Where are
> > > > > > >> > >> the 'convenience binaries' for Ignite
releases being
> built?
> > > > Even if
> > > > > > >> > >> they're not official, they should be
built on controlled
> > > > hardware
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > >> > >> the release process doc should contain
instructions for
> > > > building
> > > > > > >> them.
> > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > >> > >> -- Brane
> > > > > > >> > >>
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
>

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