maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache 3.1.0
Date Thu, 04 Jul 2013 23:00:28 GMT
On Thursday, 4 July 2013, sebb wrote:

> On 4 July 2013 20:35, Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > I am withdrawing my -1 on the basis of the feedback I have received from
> > legal-discuss.
>
> The question to legal-discuss was specifically about test data, not test
> code.


That "code" is actually test data.

The test code is in src/test/java

So my view is if it isn't compiled by the build process it is test data...
The "code" you refer to is compiled by the code under test as part of
verifying that it can build code correctly... As such it is clearly data.
If you want to bring it up with legal-discuss, go for it... But I am not
going to rush to modify test data without being sure that the modifications
do not invalidate the tests...

Now I view it rather unlikely that the test data which consists of .java
files will be corrupted by adding a license header, but I cannot say that
it will not have the effect, so this is case by case review and baby steps.


>
> Does the reply to your query about test data also apply to test code?
> As I read it, that question was not asked.
>
> There are several test code files (and related poms) that don't have AL
> headers.
>
> I think it would be worth clarifying the issue with regard to test
> code before assuming that the answers also apply to test code.


I don't believe you will get a different answer... These files have
historically been distributed, the PMC is putting in place a process to get
the number as close to zero as can be achieved without compromising on the
quality of our extensive test suite... I do not think there is an issue
here... I leave it up to others on the PMC to form their judgement on the
situation... If others disagree or wish to seek further clarification, then
they should do that. The Maven PMC is responsible for Maven releases and as
a member if the PMC I am happy with the view of this as test data

>
> > My vote is now +0 as I have not tested the distribution and I am waiting
> > for somebody else on the PMC to do the running and make a call on whether
> > we need to fix the NOTICE file for this release.
>
> There are several problems with the NOTICE and/or LICENSE files.
> One is that the NOTICE file mentions 3rd party software, but there are
> no corresponding entries in the LICENSE file. If the 3rd party
> software is not part of the source release, then the references need
> to be removed.
>
> If the 3rd party software is included (presumably as source) then the
> relevant licenses need to be included in the LICENSE file, or included
> as separate files linked from the LICENSE file.
>
> Has anyone established whether there is any 3rd party software
> included in the source release?


Interesting questions... I wonder what others think


>
> > I intend testing the distribution tomorrow unless this vote gets
> cancelled
> > ;-)
> >
> > - Stephen
> >
> > On Thursday, 4 July 2013, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >
> >> Fair enough.
> >>
> >> On Jul 4, 2013, at 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> >> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I will let Barrie decide on whether we *have to* cancel this vote
> because
> >> > of the issues he identified in the NOTICE file.
> >> >
> >> > Until I hear back from legal-discuss, I do not know whether the test
> data
> >> > issue has any changes required, so I do not know whether (on the bits
> I
> >> am
> >> > focusing) there is a requirement for us to respin yet, so from my
> point
> >> of
> >> > view I am ok with keeping the vote open until I hear back from
> >> > legal-discuss on the test data issue... but if Barrie's view is that
> with
> >> > the current NOTICE we cannot release, then no choice but to cancel the
> >> vote
> >> > now.
> >> >
> >> > I'd rather have a vote open to pester legal for a more prompt answer
> >> (from
> >> > a bunch of volunteers on the 4th of July weekend) than have no vote to
> >> push
> >> > them with.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 4 July 2013 13:54, Jason van Zyl <jason@tesla.io> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Then just make the changes you see fit and I'll roll it again. It
> will
> >> >> only take a few minutes. If we know what it should be like then we
> >> might as
> >> >> well just do it, as it's likely to take less time than asking if an
> >> >> exception can be made.
> >> >>
> >> >> I can cancel the vote. Make the changes you think are required for
> >> >> compliance and I'll cut it again.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Jul 4, 2013, at 6:05 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> >> >> stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> I have asked the legal-discuss list for an opinion on test data
sets
> >> and
> >> >>> license headers. From my reading of the current ASF position:
> >> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions we
do
> not
> >> >>> currently have an exception for test data sets.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Pending the outcome of that discussion I will have to be
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -1
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If the outcome is that we do not need to do anything for test data
> >> sets,
> >> >>> then I would be happy to switch to +1.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If the outcome is that we need to add some additional text to the
> >> NOTICE
> >> >>> files to cover the test data sets, then we will need to respin
as
> >> nobody
> >> >> on
> >> >>> the PMC can vote +1 if we are aware that the release is in
> violation of
> >> >> the
> >> >>> ASF policies and we would be neglecting our governance role.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If the outcome is that we need to add the license headers to all
the
> >> test
> >> >>> data files, then I think the PMC will have to review what we want
> to do
> >> >> as
> >> >>> adding license headers to every file in the test data set runs
the
> risk
> >> >> of
> >> >>> invalidating the test data and that is an unnecessary risk that
> would
> >> >>> cripple the project and as such I would be looking for the ASF
to
> >> change
> >> >>> such a decision and provide us with a means of using the NOTICE
> file to
> >> >>> cover the test data.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I hate being petty, but unfortunately that is part of the governance
> >> role
> >> >>> that the PMC is tasked with... :-(
> >> >>>
> >> >>> - Stephen
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 1 July 2013 03:56, Barrie Treloar <
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org <javascript:;>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org <javascript:;>
>
>

-- 
Sent from my phone

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