incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release HDT version 0.0.1.incubating (RC2)
Date Wed, 04 Dec 2013 09:40:47 GMT
On 4 December 2013 03:29, Rahul Sharma <rahul0208@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Sebb for explaining out in detail, since this is our first release I
> think we would require some guidance. We would fix the LICENSE and the
> NOTICE but there a few questions, in the same regard.
>
> This an eclipse plugin so we are using other Eclipse libs like EMF[1].
> These are based on EPL. The libs are not shipped because the eclipse
> runtime environment  takes care of them. Do they need a mention in the
> LICENSE/NOTICE ?

As I already wrote, only bits that are *included* in a distribution
need to be mentioned in the relevant N&L.

> Also the project is build using Tycho[2],  does it require to mention the
> same in LICENSE/NOTICE ?

See above.

You can / should mention these external requirements somewhere, e.g.
in a README or BUILDING file.

Note that there are some restrictions on 3rd party dependencies --
whether included or not.
See http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html

But the N&L files are only about *included* bits.

[Your mentors should really have been able to guide you on this, but I
see that only one bothered to vote on the podling list.]

> regards,
> Rahul
>
> [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eclipse_Modeling_Framework
> [2]http://www.sonatype.org/tycho/license
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 10:49 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 29 November 2013 10:21, Rahul Sharma <rahul0208@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I would like to call for a vote for Apache Hadoop Development Tools
>> > (incubating), version 0.0.1.incubating. The vote has happened of the dev
>> > mailing list and the community has approved the third release
>> > candidate(RC2) for Apache Hadoop Development Tools (incubating), version
>> > 0.0.1.incubating.The release has Zookeper and HDFS features from the
>> > *hadoop-eclipse-merge* codebase.The issues raised for RC0 and RC1 have
>> been
>> > addressed in this release.
>> >
>> > 1 IPMC votes have already been cast:
>> >   Roman Shaposhnik (mentor)
>> >
>> > Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Hadoop Development Tools
>> > 0.0.1.incubating.
>> >
>> > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache HDT 0.0.1.incubating
>> > [ ]  0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with the release
>> > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>> >
>> > PPMC Vote thread :
>> > http://apache.markmail.org/message/sqerudh5emqzqfrg
>> >
>> > Vote Result :
>> > http://apache.markmail.org/message/rvskqqernk4fmumt
>> >
>> > Source and binary files:
>> > http://people.apache.org/~rsharma/hdt-0.0.1.incubating-rc2/
>> >
>> > The tag to be voted upon:
>> >
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-hdt.git;a=commit;h=02f75eda16a8b91f0b35abad9487a9c83fd4c8d6
>>
>> NOTICE says:
>>
>> This product includes Eclipse Icons from
>> http://tech.joelbecker.net/articles/resources/5-eclipseicons - Eclipse
>> Public License v 1.0
>>
>> However the LICENSE file does not include the EPL.
>>
>> I think this is a blocker; any 3rd party inclusions must be
>> accompanied by their license, either in the LICENSE file or as a
>> separate file referenced from the LICENSE file. [The end user must be
>> able to find the licenses easily, not go searching through directory
>> trees].
>>
>> Without knowing the text of the EPL, it's not possible to determine
>> whether there also needs to be a mention in the NOTICE file (the
>> LICENSE may be sufficient) It's vital that the NOTICE file only has
>> required elements in it; unnecessary content must be removed [1]
>>
>> The binary archive contains some 3rd party libraries; these need to be
>> mentioned in the embedded LICENSE and perhaps the NOTICE file.
>>
>> I noticed SLF4J - are there any others?
>>
>> This is another blocker, IMO.
>>
>> Note that the NOTICE & LICENSE files must relate to the distribution
>> to which they belong; generally this means that the ones in the source
>> archive match the ones at the top-level of SCM (i.e. git here); the
>> binary archive may require additional entries in LICENSE and possibly
>> NOTICE.
>>
>> Also the word "Devlopment" appears in at least one NOTICE file as part
>> of the product name. Is that really the correct product name?
>>
>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
>>
>> > PGP keys used to sign the release:
>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/hdt/KEYS
>> >
>> > Some guideline to verify release can be found at :
>> > http://apache.markmail.org/message/qj3srhvozapbwmq6
>> >
>> > regards,
>> > Rahul
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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