Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ant.elder@gmail.com designates
 209.85.213.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: antelder@apache.org
In-Reply-To: <DB80F8E7-78EC-4E2F-B741-29D58CE1743E@toolazydogs.com>
References: 
 <CAOG_4QZ2z80NruEByo07=TmPJzuC8-GBGMmYK7bOE1Y71A2c3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<1361CB42-8B7F-43D0-B002-0517B9722BC7@toolazydogs.com>
	<CAOG_4QZKp4Cm+jSHgh_zPW0hP5rT0fRD8-nAHAOAitW3CwqXww@mail.gmail.com>
	<DB80F8E7-78EC-4E2F-B741-29D58CE1743E@toolazydogs.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 09:59:15 +0000
Message-ID: 
 <CAJO+UbssDorVe5pHOQG8CKPZrUsB8gV7GtKAbkR2Ci6gqnNhRA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.0-incubating
From: ant elder <ant.elder@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 4:14 AM, Alan D. Cabrera <list@toolazydogs.com> wro=
te:
>
> On Nov 23, 2011, at 5:47 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
>
>> Alan,
>>
>>>> It's unfortunate that the vote only took 24 hours on the Kafka list; i=
t
>> was my understanding that votes take 72 hours.
>>
>> Because the only change was in the NOTICE and DISCLAIMER files from
>> previous RC, our champion (Chris C) suggested we could run a quicker laz=
y
>> 24 hour vote.
>
> Yeah, I'm not sure the vote can be shortened. =A0I could be wrong. =A0If =
it can then I totally agree with the inclination to get goin' with this rel=
ease. =A0I'm sorry it's had so many first and starts.
>
>>>> Anyway, I've found some problems in the NOTICE file in that Kafka
>> uses/ship NUnit but it's not in the NOTICE file.
>>
>> Quoting sebb and Kafka's champion (Chris C) discussed this in the last v=
ote
>> -
>>
>>>>> 4) Your NOTICE file includes lot's of "This product includes X,
>> developed by X.org" Your notice file should only include notices that yo=
u
>> are *required* to have. Don't include acknowledgements in your notice fi=
le
>> just for completeness.
>>
>>>>> Just to be clear: why not?
>>
>> *>>> The NOTICE file should be as short as possible, but no shorter.
>> *
>> Having said that, we also don't have any jar like "NUnit" in the release
>> artifacts.
>
> =A0B =A0 =A0 ./bin/../clients/csharp/lib/nunit/2.5.9/nunit.framework.dll
>
> Reading the license
>
> http://www.nunit.org/index.php?p=3Dlicense&r=3D2.5.9
>
> it seems to me that an acknowledgment =A0in the product documentation is =
required. =A0Am I misreading their license? =A0(wouldn't be the first time)
>

I don't remember that license coming up before so the easiest way to
find out is to bring it up at legal-discuss@. A similar question was
raised in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-59 and the
conclusion there was it didn't have to be in the NOTICE. This is not
exactly the same but it is similar so maybe it would be ok for this
release could go ahead assuming its ok and raise a legal JIRA to
confirm that for the future?

   ...ant

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