incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Frovarp <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Droids 0.1-incubating RC2
Date Wed, 15 Jun 2011 02:35:05 GMT
On 6/14/2011 8:14 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
> O
> There should be archived VOTE threads on the droids-private list, which were
> cc'd to private@incubator.a.o.  Hopefully they were for PPMC membership.  If
> not, there will be some cleanup work to do.

The votes were handled on the droids-dev list (like they should) and 
were committer votes. So Bertil and I aren't on the PPMC.

> Excellent.  Was your work documented anywhere?  Ideally, there would be a JIRA
> issue I can read over explaining why each dependency with a non-category-A
> license is OK.

No, there is no JIRA ticket. There are no category-X defined 
dependencies. The notice file includes notices for all the category B 
defined dependencies: JUnit and javax.servlet. Those are fairly common 
in Apache projects and the requirements were met. See below.

Attached is the dependency hierarchy. All of the Apache projects are 
full projects, so they are all good. That leaves:

NekoHTML - AL2
mockito - MIT
Google Guava - AL2
Spring - AL2
JUnit - CPL v1 - Category B, binary only, appropriately labeled in the 
NOTICE.txt file
javax.servlet - Included in the Jetty notice, which states it is CDDLv1 
and copyright Sun Microsystems and ASF. Notice text copied from Solr
Jetty 6 - AL2, but requires notice (in place)
CGLib - AL2

>> Further help and guidance of course is always welcome.
> You are gracious.  I'll defer to others on guidance; I see my role as more
> that of a QC engineer.
> And to start off my QC, I'll note that there are some oddities in the top
> level directory of the archive.  Here's the file list:
>      LICENSE
>      LICENSE.txt
>      NOTICE
>      NOTICE.txt
>      droids-core
>      droids-norobots
>      droids-solr
>      droids-spring
>      droids-tika
>      droids-wicket
>      pom.xml
> The LICENSE and LICENSE.txt files are essentially duplicates of each other,
> having only whitespace differences.  However, the NOTICE and NOTICE.txt files
> are quite distinct (diff below my sig).  I think this is a blocker.

That's Maven. LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt are the two in svn. We may need 
to rename them to be without the .txt so Maven doesn't do its own thing 
there. While without txt is preferred, it is allowable to use the .txt 
file names.

> I'm not sure what the DEPENDENCIES file is supposed to tell us, but it contains
> minimal information.  Presumably it's some Maven thing I just don't grok.

That was Maven generated and I don't understand it either. I used the 
defined method of releasing via Apache Maven, including using the latest 
parent pom.

> Lastly, I think it's worth commenting on the contents of README.TXT, which
> starts off like so:
>                          A p a c h e    D r o i d s
>                          --------------------------
>                 by Thorsten Scherler<thorsten at>
> That credit is obviously inaccurate and seems quite unusual for an Apache
> project.  I know that other projects have gone out of their way to delete all
> @author tags.  Perhaps Droids might consider doing likewise.

Yes, that file needs to be cleaned up. I do see there are two source 
files with @author in them. I've fixed them in trunk. I don't think 
either of these two things are a blocker.

> I also intend to run a RAT report, and to pore over LICENSE and NOTICE more
> thoroughly, but I'm out of time for today and wanted to get you this feedback
> sooner rather than later.

Thanks for the feedback. I poured over the LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt 
files quite carefully. The RAT report was ran until it came back clean 
twice. Those should be good.

View raw message