incubator-s4-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Neumeyer <leoneume...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: S4 first release: are we OK?
Date Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:54:24 GMT
Hi Matthieu,

Regarding #1, you can use an archive of type Tar and set compression to
GZIP. It will use the right extension, I think.

task someTar(type: Tar) {
     compression = Compression.GZIP
}

-leo

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Matthieu Morel <mmorel@apache.org> wrote:

> On 7/29/12 6:34 AM, Patrick Hunt wrote:
>
>> Some comments:
>>
>> 1) .zip for the artifacts is a bit unusual (not a real problem
>> though), why not .tar.gz?
>>
>
> Zip is the default archive format with the build system that we use
> (gradle). We could certainly change that, but since it's not really an
> issue, I'd rather leave that for a later release.
>
>
>
>> 2) signing looks good
>>
>> 3) why are you shipping jars in the src artifact? is this really
>> necessary?
>>
>
> We provide a wrapper around gradle so that users don't have to install
> gradle beforehand. We need the corresponding jars, only for building. I
> managed to reduce the number of included jars to 1 though.
>
>
>
>> 4) your src license includes licenses for files not actually in the
>> artifact. You'll need separate licenses for src and bin, where src
>> license includes only for those in the artifact.
>>
>
> OK. The License file in the binary distribution now includes licenses of
> all shipped jars. For the source distribution, there is only gradle, which
> is ASL2, so it's just the ASL2 license.
>
>
>
>> 5) the jars in the bin seem ok, however there are some I'm not
>> familiar with. Have you checked that all included jars are cat A?
>>
>
> Only logback is in category B, and was already accepted for inclusion in
> other ASF projects. (see LEGAL-63)
>
> Eventually I reworked the dependency management in the project in order to
> avoid transitive dependencies. That actually helped identify a few invalid
> compile dependencies.
>
>
> Here are the other dependencies included in the binary distribution:
>
> Category A:
> BSD
> asm-3.2.jar
> kryo-1.04.jar
> minlog-1.2.jar
>
> ASL2
> gradle-base-services-1.0.jar
> gradle-core-1.0.jar
> gradle-tooling-api-1.0.jar
> gradle-wrapper-1.0.jar
> commons-beanutils-1.7.0.jar
> commons-beanutils-core-1.8.0.**jar
> commons-codec-1.4.jar
> commons-collections-3.2.1.jar
> commons-configuration-1.6.jar
> commons-digester-1.8.jar
> commons-io-2.4.jar
> commons-lang-2.4.jar
> commons-logging-1.1.1.jar
> guava-12.0.1.jar
> guice-3.0.jar
> guice-assistedinject-3.0.jar
> collections-generic-4.01.jar
> gson-1.6.jar
> jcommander-1.25.jar
> zookeeper-3.3.3.jar
> zkclient-0.1.jar
> netty-3.2.5.Final.jar
> javax.inject-1.jar
> objenesis-1.2.jar
>
>
> public domain
> aopalliance-1.0.jar
>
> CCAL (creative commons)
> jcip-annotations-1.0.jar
>
> MIT
> slf4j-api-1.6.1.jar
>
>
> Category B:
>
> EPL1.0
> logback-classic-0.9.29.jar
> logback-core-0.9.29.jar
>
>
>
>
>
>> junit for example is cddl which is cat b and best left out. I'd leave
>> out all the test specific jars.
>>
>> 6) the notice file for the bin is the same as the NOTICE file for the
>> src artifact. See the Apache license - you need to ensure that the
>> binary artifact includes all the notices of included binaries. In some
>> cases this is included in the jar file of the included binary itself,
>> but you need to check this.
>>
>
> I checked again, and as far as I understand, only CCAL work should be
> referenced there, all other dependencies do not mandate any more credit
> than the copyright already included in the license.
>
> The NOTICE file in the bin distribution now reflects that.
>
>
>
>> 7) I quickly ran through the checklist
>> http://incubator.apache.org/**guides/releasemanagement.html#**check-list<http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list>
>>
>> and everything seemed fine except for the noted items.
>>
>
>
> Thanks a lot Patrick for looking into this!
>
>
> I just finished integrating your comments, I'll create a new package ASAP,
> and submit to the general list for a vote.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthieu
>
>
>
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Matthieu Morel <mmorel@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for checking Kishore!
>>>
>>>  README. artefacts --> artifacts.
>>>>>
>>>> Actually both are orthographically correct, artefact is the british
>>> version.
>>> I will change the text if it's deemed necessary.
>>>
>>>
>>>  local maven repository should probably be local gradle cache
>>>>>
>>>> Since we use the maven plugin for gradle, "gradlew install" installs
>>> artifacts in the local maven repository.
>>>
>>>
>>>  gradlew install fails saying
>>>>>
>>>>> * What went wrong:
>>>>> Task 'install' not found in root project
>>>>> 'apache-s4-0.5.0-incubating-**bin'.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> As Flavio commented, I'm not sure we need to provide a task to install
>>> artifacts locally for the binary package. S4 libraries and dependencies
>>> are
>>> available in the lib directory and referenced from S4 scripts.
>>>
>>> What we'll need though is to publish those artifacts to a public maven
>>> repository. We'll do that once the release is accepted.
>>>
>>> Thanks again,
>>>
>>> Matthieu
>>>
>>>
>>> On 7/28/12 7:01 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Should "gradlew install" work for the bin package? it works for me for
>>>> the
>>>> src package, but not for the bin package. I thought this behavior was
>>>> correct.
>>>>
>>>> -Flavio
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 28, 2012, at 6:56 PM, kishore g wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  README. artefacts --> artifacts.
>>>>> local maven repository should probably be local gradle cache
>>>>>
>>>>> gradlew install fails saying
>>>>>
>>>>> * What went wrong:
>>>>> Task 'install' not found in root project
>>>>> 'apache-s4-0.5.0-incubating-**bin'.
>>>>>
>>>>> I downloaded the zip and tried it on my MAC
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Matthieu Morel <mmorel@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  On 7/27/12 6:15 PM, Flavio Junqueira wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  I checked that the src package compiles. I'm missing a LICENSE file
>>>>>>> containing the licenses of all binaries we have in lib/. Have
I
>>>>>>> overlooked
>>>>>>> it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are right, thanks for checking, and apologies for missing the
most
>>>>>> obvious!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also updated the release by adding the license file, and also added
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> CDDL 1.0 license for libraries that are indirectly referenced and
>>>>>> included
>>>>>> in the binary release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have pushed a new commit for these modifications, retagged,
>>>>>> recreated
>>>>>> the packages and uploaded them to the same place (still release
>>>>>> candidate
>>>>>> 1, as we haven't submitted to vote yet)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Matthieu
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  -Flavio
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2012, at 5:08 PM, Matthieu Morel wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have prepared a release for S4. Version is 0.5.0-incubating.
There
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> 2 packages: binary and source.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Available here :
>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~****mmorel/s4-0.5.0-incubating-**<http://people.apache.org/~**mmorel/s4-0.5.0-incubating-**>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> release-candidate-1/<http://**people.apache.org/~mmorel/s4-**
>>>>>>>> 0.5.0-incubating-release-**candidate-1/<http://people.apache.org/~mmorel/s4-0.5.0-incubating-release-candidate-1/>
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * I did a legal audit and added corresponding references
to licenses
>>>>>>>> * checked files with RAT: only derived files, docs, and config
files
>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> reported, so I assume it's OK.
>>>>>>>> * signed and checksumed the packages (KEYS file is in
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> svn.apache.org/repos/asf/****incubator/s4/dist/KEYS<http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/**incubator/s4/dist/KEYS>
>>>>>>>> <http://**svn.apache.org/repos/asf/**incubator/s4/dist/KEYS<http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/s4/dist/KEYS>
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> )
>>>>>>>> * tested
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I now plan to send a vote request to the general incubator
list,
>>>>>>>> using
>>>>>>>> the standard voting template.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since it's the first release, I was wondering whether I was
missing
>>>>>>>> something?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Matthieu
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>


-- 

Leo Neumeyer (@leoneu)

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message