incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tommaso Teofili <tommaso.teof...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] - Relase Apache Clerezza 0.2-incubating (RC5)
Date Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:28:18 GMT
2012/2/3 Reto Bachmann-Gmür <reto@apache.org>

> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:28 AM, ant elder <antelder@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <reto@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > While the last release candidate found a lot of acceptance (3 binding
> +1
> > in
> > > the ppmc) it had to be withdrawn because of missing or incorrect NOTICE
> > and
> > > license files. Also the source distribution contained the sources of
> > modules
> > > that are not part of the release profile. The new release candidate
> fixes
> > > these issues, for that it provides a new module containing the assembly
> > > descriptor that replicates the directory structure excluding modules
> not
> > in
> > > the release profile.
> > >
> > > This is now the fifth vote to release Clerezza parent and all the
> > modules in
> > > the release profile.
> > >
> > > A zip with the source distribution and one with the compiled tdb
> launcher
> > > are available with their signatures at:
> > >
> > > http://people.apache.org/~reto/clerezza-release-201202/
> > >
> > > In svn the release version is tagged parent-0.2-incubating.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Reto
> >
> > I've had a look and the LICENSE file in the binary distribution looks
> > good now. The binary distribution is missing the NOTICE file though.
> >
>
> I see that the with the change to the generated NOTICE files the binary
> assembly no longer contains the file. I've created CLEREZZA-682 to address
> this, can we proceed with the release anyway or is this a blocker? (just
> releasing the source version would be fine as well, imho)


> >
> > The source distribution has a README.txt which says ""This is a source
> > distribution containing different modules to which different notices
> > from copyright holders apply, see the NOTICE files in the root folders
> > of the individual modules." That might be better to also mention
> > licensing, perhaps "...different licenses and notices...see the
> > LICENSE and NOTICE files...", i'd probably still vote for it with the
> > text as it is though.
> >
> I have no problem changing this for the future, but I would like to remark
> that the current information on copyrights and licenses seems more explicit
> than the graduated apache project I looked at (sling and servicemix).
>
>
> >
> > Also remember still my comment from the previous thread - not everyone
> > here will be happy with source license doc like this and not all in
> > the top LICENSE file so pester people like your mentors to make sure
> > you'll get the necessary votes.
> >
>
> While our champion participated in the discussion, unfortunately I got no
> feedback from our mentors (sent mail on private list and added them
> individually as recipient to the last release thread). But weith Tommaso we
> had already an IPMC member vote and I understood you and Bertrand that you
> would support a release after the licensing/notice issues have been fixed.
>
> The main question seem to me if we can go on with the vote despite the
> missing notice in the binary release candidate and if yes if we should
> exclude the binary from this candidate (and decide only on releasing the
> source distro).
>
>
I think the best option would be to fix the NOTICE in binary, fire a new RC
and release the binary stuff too because releasing only the source
package, in my opinion, would be not that convenient in terms of using
Apache Clerezza as devs couldn't take the binary neither from ASF mirrors
nor from Maven Central.
WDYT?

Tommaso



> Cheers,
> Reto
>
>
> >
> >  ...ant
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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