incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron McCurry <amccu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Blur version 0.2.4-incubating RC1
Date Sat, 18 Jul 2015 21:53:04 GMT
Justin thank you for taking the time to evaluate the release.

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Tim Williams <williamstw@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for taking the time to review Justin, we appreciate it.
>
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) until the MPL issue can be resolved /
> explained, other issues can be fixed next release. For the MPL issue it may
> be that "For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF
> product at runtime in source form” may apply. [2]
>
> I think we just missed it, based on the example, I don't think we can
> use that escape-clause/rationale for its inclusion.  We should take it
> back to the dev list at this point.
>

I agree.  I will cancel the vote and we will retry soon.

Aaron


>
> > For the source release I checked:
> > - filename contains incubating
> > - signatures and hashes good
> > - DISCLAIMER exists
> > - LICENSE has minor issues + MPL issue [2]
> > - NOTICE good
> > - Some unexpected binaries in source (see below)
> > - All source file have headers
> > - Can compile form source?
> >
> > LiCENSE is missing:
> >  - MIT licensed normalize.css (see
> ./apache-blur-0.2.4-incubating-src/blur-console/src/main/webapp/public/css/blurconsole.css
> +
> ./apache-blur-0.2.4-incubating-src/blur-console/src/main/webapp/libs/bootstrap/less/normalize.less)
> > - MIT/BSD licensed polyfill (see ./docs/resources/js/respond.min.js)
> >
> > There is an issue with
> ./blur-console/src/main/webapp/libs/tagmanager/tagmanager.js as this is MPL
> licensed [2] which is weak copy left and considered a category B license.
> In this case it looks like it isn’t been handled correctly as it being
> included in source not binary form. I’m not sure how this should be handled
> given there is no compiled JS form.
> >
> >
> > There are a couple of test files that contain compiled code, can this be
> produced via the build process?
> > ./blur-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/blur/command/test1/test1.jar
> > ./blur-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/blur/command/test2/test2.jar
>
> Yeah, these were just to drive some tests but I reckon we should craft
> another way that ships in source form.
>
> > Something a little odd that caught my eye is all of the
> ./distribution/src/main/resources-hadoop1/notices/*.jar.src files. Is there
> any reason for these files to be in the source release? It look that they
> are used to generate the binary NOTICE file?
> >
>
> They're sources needed to produce a [valid] binary package so it
> seemed reasonable to me include them.
>
> > For the binary release you may want to check the LICENSE as it is
> identical to the source release [3]. For the binary NOTICE file a minor
> issue in that there is no need to repeat "This product includes software
> developed by The Apache Software Foundation “ [4].
> >
> > Re compiling from source some instructions in the README would be
> helpful as it seems a mvn install in the top directory may not do what is
> expected. (As far as I can see it seems to be doing a rat check and nothing
> else?)
>
> Yeah, we should add something to the README that hints at the
> quickstart or profiles: mvn install -Dhadoop2
>
> Thanks again for taking your time...
>
> Thanks,
> --tim
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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