incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marvin Humphrey <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 (incubating) RC2
Date Tue, 21 Aug 2012 15:01:48 GMT
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:59 AM, Branko ─îibej <> wrote:

> It is fair to require changes for the next release. It's not fair to use
> different criteria for two successive, essentially identical releases.

When the option to be "fair" exists, "fair" is great!

With regards to my own vote, I'm going to try to apply Jukka's criteria on

    Personally I'm fine with things like missing license headers or partially
    incomplete license metadata (which sounds like is the case here), as long
    as those are just omissions that don't fundamentally affect our rights (or
    those of downstream users) to distribute the releases and as long as
    there's a commitment to fix such issues in time for the next release.

Extraneous information in the NOTICE file imposes a burden on some downstream
distributors and consumers.  Thee is almost certainly room for improvement in
the AOO NOTICE file, and we have made some progress towards a consensus on
exactly what ought to be in NOTICE since the first incubating release of AOO
-- though there is also considerable room for improvement in the ASF
documentation with regards to NOTICE.  :)

However, is there anything about the NOTICE file in this AOO release candidate
which affects _rights_, either our own or those of downstream users?  I've
looked through the file, and if that's the case, I don't see it.  If sebb
thinks a respin is merited, that's his call, and his review is a welcome
contribution.  However, considering how much effort it takes to spin up an AOO
release, the good faith and substantial effort invested by the podling in
assembling the NOTICE file in the first place, and the good record of the AOO
podling in incorporating suggestions, my opinion is that a promise to
incorporate any NOTICE revisions into trunk suffices and that a new RC is not

In contrast, I am more concerned about extra files that were apparently
inadvertently committed and were not caught by either the primary mechanism of
PPMC members watching the commits list or by the last line of defense of
running a RAT report prior to rolling the release.  If files which are
incompatible with our licensing end up in a distribution, that has the
potential to affect _rights_.  And what with AOO's history, there is a big
target painted on the project and there is a conspicuous need to maintain
absolute control over what ends up in releases.

It looks like the late audit has revealed that those files are OK, but it
feels like we might have dodged a bullet.

Marvin Humphrey

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message