From general-return-67591-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@incubator.apache.org Thu Feb 14 06:05:08 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id E84CF180626 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 07:05:07 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 68498 invoked by uid 500); 14 Feb 2019 06:05:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 68484 invoked by uid 99); 14 Feb 2019 06:05:06 -0000 Received: from mail-relay.apache.org (HELO mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org) (207.244.88.152) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 06:05:06 +0000 Received: from auth2-smtp.messagingengine.com (auth2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.228]) by mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPSA id 436071170 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 06:05:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailauth.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 992C223679 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 01:05:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from imap38 ([10.202.2.88]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 14 Feb 2019 01:05:04 -0500 X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledruddtgedgkeelucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfquhhtnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucef tddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfkfgjfhffhffvufgtgfesthhqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomh epfdfoihgtkhcuufgvmhgsucghvghvvghrfdcuoehmtghksegrphgrtghhvgdrohhrgheq necuffhomhgrihhnpegrphgrtghhvgdrohhrghenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epmhgtkhdomhgvshhmthhprghuthhhphgvrhhsohhnrghlihhthidqvdegleehkeduieeh qddufeejheelgeejjedqmhgtkheppegrphgrtghhvgdrohhrghesshgvmhgsrdifvghvvg hrrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0EE063A1E3; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 01:05:04 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.1.5-832-gba113d7-fmstable-20190201v1 X-Me-Personality: 24958165 Message-Id: <11075614-2f72-473a-ad45-3902de2d4db0@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 01:05:02 -0500 From: "Mick Semb Wever" To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: the case of the maven wrapper Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > As binaries are not allowed in source repos, the maven wrapper > introduces a small java source file which bootstraps the tool. This > has Apache license headers on it.=20 Takari is an Apache licensed codebase.=20 My understanding is that there is a requirement to include it in the NOT= ICE.txt file. Furthermore, Takari contains no copyright. Is this of concern? http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html > As a part of Zipkin's first attempt to vote a release on the general > list =E2=80=A6 asking for it to be in the NOTICE box.=20 One of the tings I've noticed is that the vetos on a podling's first rel= ease can be a bit harsh. I do really love the "community over code" motto, and i would hope to se= e the incubator being a leader in displaying the warmth and inclusion th= at leads to a healthy and enjoyable community. On releases I would rather see such vetos replaced with comments that ar= e feedback, while still obvious that they are an issue that is expected = to be fixed by the next release (and before graduation). I think this wo= uld be warmer feedback, and permit a more incremental approach to gettin= g to the standard of release required for graduation. Momentum and results is an important motivator, and there's a lot to lea= rn about the ASF requirements on the podling's journey to graduation. > It feels we are just > adding things to it and as an end user, I'm not sure how this would > add clarity.=20 An apache release is first aimed at someone who builds the source artefa= ct. Even if this isn't the popular use-case. This also highlights the value in having the takari wrapper in place. > Even if it did, I'm concerned that we are jumping to a > enforcement remediation when no-one seems to be doing it at all. I've seen this unfairness bite a bit already. Feedback that the incubator provides to podlings should be in context of= the broader precedence in the ASF. If it's something that's not being strictly adhered to by graduate proje= cts, it would make a world of difference to podlings if they saw everyon= e was getting pulled up on the violation. Otherwise it comes across as p= odlings are required to meet a standard well above the graduate projects= , and that becomes a real deterrence for many to entering Apache. This would add some burden to the Incubator. Surveys of graduate project= s would be required to see such precedence on issues. And resulting feed= back to graduate projects can also be tricky, nobody likes to feel that = they are being picked on. IDK, but maybe this feedback can go to the boa= rd, and the board can pick one issue per quarter and request projects ad= dress them by their next board report. regards, Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org