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 jghoman@gmail.com designates
 209.85.192.180 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADiKvVs6Hkt+VsWFoJG0_xwUCd9NHLZHL66hqmbJaisn9Zv4ug@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CADiKvVuCsGs72Ff34awru8k8OoZg5PL=Va1m1B-8391nueZE8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3362C085-8418-47C8-9CE9-37CD0F9F491A@me.com>
 <CADiKvVs6Hkt+VsWFoJG0_xwUCd9NHLZHL66hqmbJaisn9Zv4ug@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jakob Homan <jghoman@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 09:10:25 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CADiKvVvWAUZ1yPRsSaiw_3DTyFymRRtD3wv3vT7aLU7=4+bCZg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Samza 0.7.0-incubating RC0
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e4fc468559e04fd0fe783

--047d7b2e4fc468559e04fd0fe783
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

I've opened a JIRA for the dist release (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-7980) and will move the KEYS
file there once the directories are created.


On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Jakob Homan <jghoman@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> I note that there is an SIL licensed font in the distribution, this is a
>> category b license [1] are the PPMC satisfied that all conditions noted in
>> [1] are met? Looking at the LICENSE this seems good to me but no harm in
>> double checking.
>>
>>
> Yes: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-112
>
>
>
>>  There are a few binary files in the source distribution
>> - font files (fontawsome + gyphicons)
>>
> If appropriately licensed binary font files used in documentation and the
> system's web interfaces can't be included, then neither should image files
> (.png, jpeg, etc).  To my knowledge, there's no established method for
> bringing these files in during compilation/build, but I'll take a look at
> for the next release.
>
>
>> - doc .graffle files
>>
>> Could an alternative format be found for the omigraffle files?
>>
>> The graffle files are sources for diagrams in our documentation and are
> processed/compiled/saved/exported into PNGs.  Peeking at them in vim shows
> that they're actually XML files, and so not binary (
> http://bit.ly/graffleXML).
>
> Things you may want to consider changing for the next RC / release:
>> - Have [VOTE][RESULT] with tally of binding votes
>> - Place release in https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/
>> - Add "apache" to release artefact name
>> - Change name to be more in line with other Apache releases ie use "src"
>> at end rather than "sources" at front
>> - Not sure that KEYS is useful inside .tgz
>> - Could use short version of licenses in LICENSE [2]
>> - remove ".reviewboardrc"
>> - double check gyphicon LICENSE is MIT
>>
> Gyphicons are used as part of bootstrap (http://glyphicons.com/license/),
> which is MIT (http://getbootstrap.com/, bottom of page)
>
> - is docs/Gemfile.lock needed?
>>
> It's part of our sources,used to build the docs, so yes. It defines the
> dependency versions used to build the docs...
>
> I'll open a JIRA to tiday up the other items in the list and we've already
> changed the NOTICE file wording.  I'd like to continue with this VOTE if
> the NOTICE is all that is of immediate concern. @sebb, you ok with this?
>

--047d7b2e4fc468559e04fd0fe783--