incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [RESULT][VOTE] TinkerPop 3.0.1-incubating Release
Date Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:13:05 GMT
Ideally we leave votes open for 72 hrs in case anyone has a -1 after 3 +1s
cast.
On Sep 15, 2015 15:55, "Stephen Mallette" <spmallette@gmail.com> wrote:

> The vote for releasing Apache TinkerPop passed with 3 binding +1s, 0
> non-binding +1s, and no 0 or -1.
>
> Binding +1s:
> Daniel Gruno
> Justin Mclean
> Rich Bowen
>
> Thanks to those who gave us a hand and added a vote.
>
> Separately, Justin, I'll try to get LICENSE/NOTICE right for the next run.
> I suspect I'll be pinging this list separately for a bit more guidance
> before then.  Thanks.
>
> Stephen
>
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 5:39 AM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > > I suppose I still could have missed something, but I thought i'd gotten
> > the bulk of it right - could you please
> > > tell me what you noticed that I missed or misunderstood from your last
> > > post?
> >
> > Only things in the release need to be in LICENSE or NOTICE [1]. I’d check
> > that first. Permissive licensed software (i.e. MIT/BSD) don't need to go
> in
> > NOTICE [5], I can see there a few of those there.
> >
> > > Does that simply mean that I should remove all apache licensed
> > dependencies
> > > from the binary NOTICE and all is good?
> >
> > Generally when adding Apache licenced software there's no need to modify
> > LICENSE or NOTICE unless it has a NOTICE file [2]. That means you
> generally
> > don’t have to add much when bundling other ASF projects especially when
> > they have a boilerplate NOTICE file. [3] The no need to add Apache
> licensed
> > software to LICENSE but it not an licensing error to do so. I generally
> > don’t mind that as it makes checking releases a little easier when
> > reviewing.
> >
> > Not that dependancies of dependancies matter [4]. Rather than go down
> that
> > rabbit hole just look inside all the jars in the release with something
> > like this:
> > find . -name "*.jar" -exec tar ft {} \; | sort -u > paths.txt
> >
> > Look at all of the classes contained to see what’s included. For example
> > with TinkerPop I see that it includes "com/carrotsearch/hppc” and looking
> > at its license (Apache) I can see it has a NOTICE file (which looks
> > incorrect but that’s another story), so that would need to be considered
> > and possibly something added to TinkerPop’s NOTICE. In this case I’d
> > probably assume a standard NOTICE and add a copyright line to the NOTICE
> > file - but that’s not the only valid solution. It's may not be always
> clear
> > cut what needs to be done and you may have to consider each on a case by
> > case basis.
> >
> > If any questions come up ask you mentors, ask this list or on legal
> > discuss.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> >
> > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#guiding-principle
> > 2.. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
> > 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product
> > 4. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#deps-of-deps
> > 5. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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