incubator-blur-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Williams <william...@gmail.com>
Subject blur-console tagmanager.js
Date Mon, 20 Jul 2015 02:08:49 GMT
Justin noticed in our RC that we include tagmanager.js, which is
category B.  I'm not sure what role it plays in the console - anyone
know of an alternative to it's functionality under an acceptable
license?

Thanks,
--tim


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 8:01 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Blur version 0.2.4-incubating RC1
To: general@incubator.apache.org


Hi,

Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) until the MPL issue can be resolved /
explained, other issues can be fixed next release. For the MPL issue
it may be that "For small amounts of source that is directly consumed
by the ASF product at runtime in source form” may apply. [2]

For the source release I checked:
- filename contains incubating
- signatures and hashes good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE has minor issues + MPL issue [2]
- NOTICE good
- Some unexpected binaries in source (see below)
- All source file have headers
- Can compile form source?

LiCENSE is missing:
 - MIT licensed normalize.css (see
./apache-blur-0.2.4-incubating-src/blur-console/src/main/webapp/public/css/blurconsole.css
+ ./apache-blur-0.2.4-incubating-src/blur-console/src/main/webapp/libs/bootstrap/less/normalize.less)
- MIT/BSD licensed polyfill (see ./docs/resources/js/respond.min.js)

There is an issue with
./blur-console/src/main/webapp/libs/tagmanager/tagmanager.js as this
is MPL licensed [2] which is weak copy left and considered a category
B license. In this case it looks like it isn’t been handled correctly
as it being included in source not binary form. I’m not sure how this
should be handled given there is no compiled JS form.

There are a couple of test files that contain compiled code, can this
be produced via the build process?
./blur-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/blur/command/test1/test1.jar
./blur-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/blur/command/test2/test2.jar

Something a little odd that caught my eye is all of the
./distribution/src/main/resources-hadoop1/notices/*.jar.src files. Is
there any reason for these files to be in the source release? It look
that they are used to generate the binary NOTICE file?

For the binary release you may want to check the LICENSE as it is
identical to the source release [3]. For the binary NOTICE file a
minor issue in that there is no need to repeat "This product includes
software developed by The Apache Software Foundation “ [4].

Re compiling from source some instructions in the README would be
helpful as it seems a mvn install in the top directory may not do what
is expected. (As far as I can see it seems to be doing a rat check and
nothing else?)

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
2. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b
3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary
4. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Mime
View raw message