incubator-blur-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Blur version 0.2.2-incubating - RC1
Date Fri, 16 May 2014 15:43:41 GMT
Good idea. Sounds reasonable to me.

Patrick

On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 4:38 AM, Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Aaron McCurry <amccurry@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Thanks for the feedback!
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Patrick Hunt <phunt@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I see a number of NOTICE files in the source artifact. e.g.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> ./distribution/src/main/resources-hadoop1/notices/jetty-6.1.26.jar.NOTICE
>>> >>
>>> >> I don't believe you should be including these given the artifact
>>> >> doesn't include those jars. I'm not sure what to make of this...
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > These *.NOTICE files are a part of the source distro because we use them
>>> > plus the embedded script to generate the NOTICE file for the binary
>>> > artifact.  It it enough to explain there existence or do we need to
>>> rename
>>> > them there extension to something else?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Honestly, I'm not sure (haven't seen this before with recent incubator
>>> projects). I'd just be concerned re confusion... Perhaps one of the
>>> other mentors can comment, my concern may be unwarranted.
>>>
>>> Given this is a release tool (iiuc) and not part of blur itself,
>>> perhaps it would be better to move this elsewhere? Into it's own
>>> subdirectory separate from the project "source"?
>>>
>>> e.g. cassandra keeps it's logo in the svn repository, but it's
>>> separate from the released "source":
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/cassandra/
>>>
>>
>> What if we kept them in the source repo, but removed them from the source
>> artifact upon release?  Only the combined binary NOTICE is needed to create
>> the binary artifact from the source artifact.  We really only need those
>> files when we need to add or change the binary NOTICE file.
>>
>> What are people's thoughts on this?
>
> I'd just renaming them to something that can't reasonably be confused
> with a formal NOTICE and move on rather than redo packaging and all.
>
>> Also is this something that should hold up this release?
>
> I don't view this as a blocker.
>
>> Should we start the vote over considering that the mail list issues of last
>> week?
>
> Yes, I think some momentum was lost with the mail issues and a vote
> restart would help.
>
> --tim

Mime
View raw message