incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ali Lown <...@lown.me.uk>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Wave 0.4 based on RC2
Date Mon, 03 Jun 2013 19:14:26 GMT
Looking back over this, in preparation of doing some more work on this.
Comments/questions inlined:

> - Unusual CHANGES file: I usually see people adding issue numbers our of
> Jira

The Wave Jira is fairly incomplete wrt. actual changes that have
occurred. (I would estimate about half of the changes have Jira
tickets, all recent ones have review board numbers, but early commits
have neither).

As such, I saw it mentioned in the Common's guide that the use of an
'svn log' instead was not strange.

What do you suggest doing with this instead?

> - Example NOTICE file: http://www.apache.org/licenses/example-NOTICE.txt,

Ok. I shall rewrite this to be in that style.

> Mockito is not mentioned with link as the others

Will be added. :)

> - server-config.xml, jsongadgets.json, jaas.config no license. Maybe others
> too? Please utilize: http://creadur.apache.org/rat/ it's a great tool to
> check our licenses

Rat looks useful. I will add a note to the release page and on the
wiki, but I think it will be easiest to run standalone ATM. (Perhaps
it can be made part of the mavenized process though).

> - request_codereview wrong license (Google Inc)?

I am not even sure why this file hasn't been deleted yet. It was only
used for the old Google code reviews, and doesn't work with
review-board. (And has no reason to be made to work with it). I will
remove this file.

> - files in /spec - allowed to distribute? No License given, where do these
> files come from?

These files are the whitepapers behind the conversation and federation
protocols that Google wrote. Should I just add the license header to
them and leave them where they are?

> - src folder: we usually use org.apache prefix. Not seen any classes with
> that

Heh. You are correct that the org.apache prefix is not used at-all.
The majority of the code lives under the org.waveprotocol namespace
(for legacy reasons). Changing to use org.apache is a fairly major
undertaking, and would serve little purpose if the next release is
going to be mavenized (with the full codebase relocation that brings).

> - thirdparty: allowed to distribute? Check with compatible licenses. Full
> list whats working what not is here:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a

My understanding from the work Angus did is that these are all under
licenses allowing distribution. We have an ant task (ant
get-third-party) for the few we are not allowed to distribute.

> - Wave Logo (/war) seems to miss TM symbol. Please check:
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs.html

I assume you are referring to war/static/logo.png. Notably this is a
different image to the logo used on the incubator website. (Which also
lacks a TM).

Which of these should be used? Should they both have a trademark?

> - Whats the meaning of wave-0.4-release folder?

A good question. I don't remember seeing that before, but it
definitely shouldn't be there. :P
(It appears my branch folder wasn't quite as clean as I thought).

> - Whats the meaning of whitepapers folder?

This holds the rest of the whitepapers, but these are older than the
ones in spec/, and are no-longer fully up-to-date wrt. the code.
Though still often contain useful information explaining why something
has been done in the way that it has.

Should I just add the license header and leave them there?

Alternatively, perhaps spec/ and whitepapers/ would be better licensed
and moved into doc/?

Ali

Mime
View raw message