In the link you posts, it basically says autotools stuff is ok. Also, all the m4 files except gtest.m4 have there other bsd style license license. gtest.m4 comes from gtest, which is new bsd, so perhaps this should also include in the file, though in source file the license wasn't explicitly there.
In any case, I think we should remove the hedwig cpp client from the source, and possibly all of hedwig, because it's not being used by anyone and it's not being maintained. This was something I hoped to discuss after 4.2.3 was out though. -Ivan On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 01:40:23PM +0100, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > At this point, I'd rather proceed with the release candidate if there is no > problem. I'm basically trying to determine if this is ok or not according to > ASF. What you say makes sense, but I'd like to have some reference to point > to. > > The command I used was this one: > > java -jar ../apache-rat-0.10/apache-rat-0.10.jar . > > -Flavio > > On 12 Jun 2014, at 13:30, Ivan Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I mean what command did you run? It should have been > > mvn apache-rat:check > > > > These files have always been excluded from rat. 2 are auto generated, > > one is the changes.txt which noone adds a license to. The others are > > for the hedwig cpp configure script. These can't have a new license > > added, as we didn't write them. Shipping the m4 files with the script > > is the standard way to make a autotools project configurable. > > > > If you want to remove them, we need to remove the whole cpp client, > > which I have no problem with, as it's pretty much unmaintained. > > > > -Ivan > > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 01:15:17PM +0100, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >> Directly from the command line, I haven't done it through maven, but what > >> matters to me is that I'd like to know if we have a story for those files. > >> In this page: > >> > >> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#which-files-contain-license > >> > >> It says that every file needs a license. This other page: > >> > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html > >> > >> Talks about non-apache licenses, but I didn't really see anything that > >> applies to us. I'm basically trying to determine if it is ok to exclude > >> those and based on what arguments. I just don't want us to get in trouble > >> as > >> other projects that haven't been releasing artifacts properly. > >> > >> -Flavio > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Ivan Kelly [mailto:[email protected]] > >> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 1:00 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Bookkeeper 4.2.3 release candidate 0 > >> > >> This are all explicitly excluded in the pom. How did you run rat? > >> > >> -Ivan > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 11:20:05AM +0100, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > >>> I ran the rat tool and the one thing that called my attention was this: > >>> > >>> Unapproved licenses: > >>> > >>> ./CHANGES.txt > >>> > >> ./bookkeeper-server/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/proto/DataFormats.ja > >> va > >>> ./hedwig-client/src/main/cpp/aminclude.am > >>> ./hedwig-client/src/main/cpp/m4/ax_boost_asio.m4 > >>> ./hedwig-client/src/main/cpp/m4/ax_boost_base.m4 > >>> ./hedwig-client/src/main/cpp/m4/ax_boost_thread.m4 > >>> ./hedwig-client/src/main/cpp/m4/ax_doxygen.m4 > >>> ./hedwig-client/src/main/cpp/m4/gtest.m4 > >>> > >> ./hedwig-protocol/src/main/java/org/apache/hedwig/protocol/PubSubProtocol.ja > >> va > >>> ./hedwig-server/src/main/resources/p12.pass > >>> > >>> I'm just wondering if we have a justification for these. > >>> > >>> -Flavio > >>> > >>> On 10 Jun 2014, at 16:36, Ivan Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> This is the first release candidate for Apache Bookkeeper, version > >>>> 4.2.3. > >>>> > >>>> This is a bugfix release for 4.2.2. > >>>> > >>>> Notable fixes and improvements include new utilities to give > >>>> administrators better visibility of cluster state (BOOKKEEPER-746), > >>>> improvements to allow for smoother rolling upgrades > >>>> (BOOKKEEPER-745), fixes to ledger polling to ensure metadata updates > >>>> aren't missed > >>>> (BOOKKEEPER-710 & BOOKKEEPER-747) and shading of protobuf libraries > >>>> to avoid conflicts when included with other version (BOOKKEEPER-708). > >>>> > >>>> The full release notes is available at: > >>>> > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12325 > >>>> 569&styleName=Html&projectId=12311293 > >>>> > >>>> *** Please download, test and vote by June 16th 2014, 10:00 UTC+0. > >>>> *** > >>>> > >>>> Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided > >>>> for convenience. > >>>> > >>>> Source and binary files: > >>>> http://people.apache.org/~ivank/bookkeeper-4.2.3-candidate-0/ > >>>> > >>>> Maven staging repo: > >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebookkeep > >>>> er-1000/ > >>>> > >>>> The tag to be voted upon: > >>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/bookkeeper/tags/release-4 > >>>> .2.3 > >>>> > >>>> Bookkeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release: > >>>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/bookkeeper/dist/KEYS > >>>> > >>>> Please download the the source package, and follow the README to > >>>> build and run a bookkeeper and hedwig service. > >>> > >> >
