incubator-kato-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Burrell Donkin <>
Subject Re: Happy New Year - and what do we do next?
Date Wed, 06 Jan 2010 22:00:57 GMT
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Craig L Russell <> wrote:
> Hi Stuart,
> On Jan 6, 2010, at 3:07 AM, Stuart Monteith wrote:
>> Hello Craig,
>>   I have already volunteered to be the release manager,
> Then you have already passed the biggest hurdle. ;-)


>> although unless you've read through the past couple of months of postings
>> you are unlikely to have picked up on that, it's not written on our wiki
>> pages. I have taken some tags for the release candidates - currently there
>> is only Steve and myself who is
>> commiting code. This is our first release, so we are feeling our way.
> That is the Apache way. Look around at other projects, especially at other
> incubating projects that have made releases. There are several examples
> within the past month.


release often, release early

>> I've been wanting to get the release done correctly, without any nasty
>> ongoing legal problems.
> It's unlikely that you will encounter ongoing legal problems. Getting a
> release candidate reviewed by the RAT program will expose much of the legal
> issues. The rest is making sure that the release bits are reviewed by the
> kato team and voted on and then voted on by the incubator.
>> Quoting Robert Donkin from the 14th December:
>> "i've been floating the idea of a multi-stage audit to try to help
>> podlings pass the technical side of their first release without too
>> much pain. fancy trying it out?"
>> I replied yes, it sounded like a good idea, but we've still to get details
>> of what that involves.
> I'm not sure either. Robert is busy with some schoolwork so you might
> inquire on the incubator list to see if he's communicated his ideas more
> widely. I don't recall any details.

(i need a break so i'll see what i can do in 30 mins)


here are my working notes. these are non-normative.

* can't see clear link to source from website (not a problem for me
but apache projects need to attract developers to stay healthy) or get
involved style stuff for that matter
** status source link works ok but there's information missing from
that page which mentors should really update sometime soon
* NOTICE - it's within the okish range as far as i'm concerned but
other people have started objecting to recently, In particular
** Double check the preamble "NOTICE file corresponding to the section
4 d of" and search the incubator mail archive
** I'm not sure about the IBM section. If it's required by the grant
then cool. If it just seemed like a good idea to someone then IIRC a
lot of people now think that NOTICE documents should be very minimal.
search the incubator list for recent releases.
* Ran RAT on trunk
** Lots of .project and .classpath files without license headers,
probably intention
*** Possibly not copyrightable under US law, and unlikely to be copied
from elsewhere so i'm not worried about potential infringement
** org.apache.kato/kato.jdump/pom.xml is missing it's license header.
again, unlikely to be infringing. likely to be a oversight in this
** A number of text files missing headers which look to be test
resources. Probably not copyrightable under US and unlikely to have
been copied from elsewhere so not worried about potential
infringement.  Being test resource probably can't have headers added.
** A couple of documents which look like sources for META-INF/services
stuff. Confident that these are not copyrightable under US and are
unlikely to be copied in any case so no chance of infringing. These
are ok as far as i'm concerned
** A README has missed RAT's heuristic but no real need for a header on that


Licensing and legal stuff looks ok in general

unless this was intentional, i think that
org.apache.kato/kato.jdump/pom.xml looks like it's missing a license

check the following points:
  * the current incubator fashion on:
     * no license headers on .classpath and .project (ok by me but i'm
not up to date)
     * NOTICE - header and IBM footer (within normal range by me but
i'm not up to date and am from the tolerant NOTICE school)

otherwise, well done


- robert

View raw message