incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Relese OpenWebBeans M3- (Second Try)
Date Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:25:29 GMT
On 18/09/2009, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Sebb,
>
>
>  >>>The several (all?) of the war files in the samples directory tree
>  >>>contain jsf-facelets-1.1.14.jar.
>  >>>This does not appear to be ASF software, but is not mentioned in
>  >>>NOTICE or LICENSE.
>  >>>IMO this is a blocker.
>
>
> I removed it from the NOTICE file because it appears that JSF Facelet is licensed under
Apache License, Version 2.0. You can look at https://facelets.dev.java.net/ for further information.
>

Nevertheless, IMO it still needs to be mentioned in the LICENSE file.

For example, add something like:

"jsf-facelets-1.1.14.jar is released under the terms of the Apache
License, version 2.0 which is included at the start of this file."

>  >>>The signing key does not have an ASF e-mail address.
>  >>>Not a blocker, but please fix for the next release candidate.
>
>
> I updated my KEY to include my apache account. http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=Gurkan+Erdogdu&op=index
contains gerdogdu@apache.org
>

OK, I guess I need to refresh my keyring.

>  >>>Not quite sure what the point of the -all archives is.
>
> >>>As far as I can tell it's just binaries + source; IMO it's unnecessary....
>
>
>  >>>Also, while I think of it - do the archive names (and top-level dirs)
>  >>>have to include -distribution-? It makes the name rather long. (not a
>  >>>blocker, but please consider for the next release).
>
>
> From the 2 points of above comments, we got advices our mentor while we were releasing
>  the our first milestone (M1) about how we create distribution bundles and its name.
>
>  Sure, I can remove "all" packages from the next release.
>
>  Thanks;
>
>  --Gurkan
>
>
>
>
>  ________________________________
>  From: sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>
>  To: general@incubator.apache.org
>  Sent: Friday, September 18, 2009 2:52:31 AM
>  Subject: Re: [VOTE] Relese OpenWebBeans M3- (Second Try)
>
>
>  On 17/09/2009, Gurkan Erdogdu <gurkanerdogdu@yahoo.com> wrote:
>  > Hi;
>  >
>  >  This is the second try of releasing the OpenWebBeans M3. I have corrected Sebb's
concerns.
>  >
>  >  OpenWebBeans is an ASL-licensed implementation of the JSR-299: Contexts and Dependency
Injection for the Java EE platform which is
>  >  defined as JSR-299. OpenWebBeans entered the incubator in October 26, 2008.
>  >
>  >  There
>  >  are two *binding*  +1 VOTEs from openwebbeans-dev@..  We still require
>  >  to get an one more binding IPMC Member +1 VOTE  to publish M3 release.
>  >
>  >
>  >  Plugins repository
>  >  --------------------------
>  >  http://people.apache.org/~gerdogdu/staging-repo/OWB/1.0.0-incubating-M3-rc2/plugins/org/apache/openwebbeans
>
>  The several (all?) of the war files in the samples directory tree
>  contain jsf-facelets-1.1.14.jar.
>  This does not appear to be ASF software, but is not mentioned in
>  NOTICE or LICENSE.
>  IMO this is a blocker.
>
>  >  Distribution content
>  >  ----------------------------
>  >  http://people.apache.org/~gerdogdu/staging-repo/OWB/1.0.0-incubating-M3-rc2/distribution/org/apache/openwebbeans/apache-openwebbeans-distribution/1.0.0-incubating-M3/
>
>  The binary jar contains a war file which contains jsf-facelets-1.1.14.jar.
>  This does not appear to be ASF software, but is not mentioned in
>  NOTICE or LICENSE.
>  IMO this is a blocker.
>
>  The signing key does not have an ASF e-mail address.
>  Not a blocker, but please fix for the next release candidate.
>
>  The source archive has a slightly odd directory structure, as it has
>  an extra src/ directory in the path (not a blocker, but consider
>  removing for the next release)
>
>  Not quite sure what the point of the -all archives is.
>  As far as I can tell it's just binaries + source; IMO it's unnecessary
>  to provide a combined archive. And because of the combined archive
>  stores the source under src/, it contains two copies of all the sample
>  source files that are in the binary archive. Not a blocker, but is it
>  worth all the extra disk space (not to mention additional time to
>  review releases)?  it might make getting votes easier next time if the
>  all archive was dropped ...).
>
>  Also, while I think of it - do the archive names (and top-level dirs)
>  have to include -distribution-? It makes the name rather long. (not a
>  blocker, but please consider for the next release).
>
>  >  SVN Tag
>  >  ----------------------------
>  >  http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/openwebbeans/tags/openwebbeans-1.0.0-incubating-M3-rc2/
>
>  Trivial typo in NOTICE.txt: "This products " => "This product "
>
>  >  The release vote on the openwebbeans-dev mailing list resulted in *five* +1
>  >  votes and no 0 or -1 votes from podling PMC members.
>  >
>  >  [VOTE Thread] : http://www.mail-archive.com/openwebbeans-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg01228.html
>  >
>  >  More information about the project can be found here:
>  >
>  >  [Incubation Status Page ] : http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openwebbeans.html
>  >  [Project Page]            : http://incubator.apache.org/openwebbeans/1.0.0-SNAPSHOT/index.html
>  >  [Wiki Page]               : http://cwiki.apache.org/OWB/
>  >  [Blog]                    : http://blogs.apache.org/OWB/
>  >
>  >  This vote is open for 72 hours.
>  >
>  >  Thanks;
>  >
>  >
>  >  -- Gurkan
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>  For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message