incubator-s4-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matthieu Morel <mmo...@apache.org>
Subject Re: S4 first release: are we OK?
Date Wed, 01 Aug 2012 14:30:46 GMT
This is the list of missing items on the status page. Is anyone of them 
a blocker for a software release during incubation?

Note that I don't have the missing information, hopefully someone has.

Matthieu


* Identify the project to be incubated
** Make sure that the requested project name does not already exist and 
check www.nameprotect.com to be sure that the name is not already 
trademarked for an existing software product.

(Note from Matthieu: I tried to check that through the TESS US page, but 
can't get it to work for the query "S4")

** If request from an existing Apache project to adopt an external 
package, then ask the Apache project for the SVN module and mail address 
names.
** If request from outside Apache to enter an existing Apache project, 
then post a message to that project for them to decide on acceptance.
** If request from anywhere to become a stand-alone PMC, then assess the 
fit with the ASF, and create the lists and modules under the incubator 
address/module names if accepted.

* Infrastructure
** Ask infrastructure to set up and archive mailing lists.
** Ask infrastructure to set up wiki (Confluence, Moin).

* Mentor-related responsibility/oversight
date	item
** Subscribe all Mentors on the pmc and general lists.
** Give all Mentors access to the incubator SVN repository. (to be done 
by the Incubator PMC chair or an Incubator PMC Member wih karma for the 
authorizations file)
** Tell Mentors to track progress in the file 
'incubator/projects/{project.name}.html'

* Copyright
** Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF 
been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, 
the core code, and any new code produced by the project.

Establish a list of active committers
** Check that all active committers have submitted a contributors agreement.
** Ask root for the creation of committers' accounts on people.apache.org.



On 7/31/12 7:28 PM, Matthieu Morel wrote:
> On 7/31/12 6:34 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote:
>> I see another issue with the release. The incubator status page seems
>> way out of date, you need to update this prior to releasing:
>> http://incubator.apache.org/projects/s4.html
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-status
>>
>> how to update:
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/ppmc.html#Project+Status+Updates
>
> Thanks for pointing this out.
>
> I filled what I could and updated the incubator status page,
> unfortunately I don't have all the required information.
>
> Hopefully initiators or coordinators of the migration to Apache can jump
> in to help fill missing items.
>
>
>>
>> Also the apache s4 web site will need to be updated as well, have you
>> considered this?
>
> Yes, most of the documentation will be on the wiki, and we'll update the
> links to point to the new release.
>
>
> Matthieu
>
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 6:12 AM, Matthieu Morel <mmorel@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>> On 7/30/12 7:54 PM, Leo Neumeyer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Leo, unfortunately the creation of the binary distribution is not
>>> directly overridable to create a tar.gz , since it's created by the
>>> application plugin.
>>> For this release, we'll just provide zip archives, which is also fine.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Matthieu
>>>
>>>
>>>> -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
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>


Mime
View raw message