incubator-blur-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Rohr <rohr.ch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: blur-console tagmanager.js
Date Mon, 20 Jul 2015 12:46:47 GMT
I can help take a look at an alternative.  It is used for building up
facets in the search portion of the console.

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:09 PM Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com> wrote:

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