As found by Justin, the src distribution and NOTICE should be updated.
I will fix that and re-cut a release.
Thanks,
Regards
JB
On 01/26/2016 02:46 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
Hi all,
I submit Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating release to your vote (take 2, new
tentative fixing src distributio
Hi Justin,
thanks for the guidance. You are right, it's our role as mentors to
help, I missed the binaries in the src distribution (my bad), but the
NOTICE looked good to me (in regards of the dependencies usage in
assembly and Maven pom).
Thanks !
Regards
JB
On 01/27/2016 05:52 AM, Justin
HI,
> For the NOTICE, as said on another thread, honestly, it's very difficult to
> know what to include or not.
Just follow the how to [1] and get a couple of people to review. Your mentors
should be able to help as well. What matters is what is bundled and how those
bundled bits are licensed
Hi Justin,
thanks for the feedback.
For the binary, we gonna fix that.
For the NOTICE, as said on another thread, honestly, it's very difficult
to know what to include or not. Serge generated the NOTICE file (note
that the NOTICE generated is not the same in binary and source
distributions)
Hi,
-1 binding until license and crypto issues are cleared up.
I notice the NOTICE mentions "Classpath Exception to the GPL” this is Category
X and can’t be included in an release. See
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
This release also looks to contain crypto software - has
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Ting(Goden) Yao wrote:
> (I was told this email wasn't received by the mailing list so resending it)
>
> Incubator PMC,
>
> The Apache HAWQ (incubating) community has voted on and
> approved the proposal to release Apache HAWQ 2.0.0-beta (incubating).
> The voting
(I was told this email wasn't received by the mailing list so resending it)
Incubator PMC,
The Apache HAWQ (incubating) community has voted on and
approved the proposal to release Apache HAWQ 2.0.0-beta (incubating).
The voting result is available at:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incu
Hi,
Sorry but it’s -1 binding as there are unexpected binary files in the source
release.
There are a few other things that need to be fixed but they wouldn’t be
blockers (IMO) for this release.
I checked:
- name includes incubating
- signatures all good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE is OK
-
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> I've been aware of Guacamole for several years. Definitely keen to see it
> join the ASF.
>
Thanks, Noel!
I've been keeping the rest of the guac team apprised of the overall
response here, and we're all pretty enthused to be bumping int
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
>
>> On Jan 25, 2016, at 4:31 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>>
>> You're an ASF Member, so you can join the IPMC any time just by sending a
>> request email to private@incubator. Personally, I hope you'll consider it
>> because I've seen some gre
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
> I started a Google doc to try to clear this up in a simple "if/then" type
> layout:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eftfjrWpOG-dRkw9dZWRfcj3p_qCeE5xC-G0Y5j29Ck/edit
Nice work!
> I have a bunch of confusion/open questions still, and ema
I started a Google doc to try to clear this up in a simple "if/then" type
layout:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eftfjrWpOG-dRkw9dZWRfcj3p_qCeE5xC-G0Y5j29Ck/edit
I have a bunch of confusion/open questions still, and email threads don't
seem to be the best way to clear these things up, because
There really isn't a difference between things copied without modification
and things copied with modification insofar as copyright is concerned.
Copying without modification into a larger work is just a special case of a
derived work. The change introduced is represented by adding the rest of
the
> On Jan 25, 2016, at 4:31 PM, Marvin Humphrey wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Greg Trasuk wrote:
>>
>> Checked into the policies - I’m not on the IPMC, so don’t qualify as a
>> Mentor, and I think the “Interested Contributors” section is more for
>> members of the existing communi
Hi all,
After opened for over 72 hours, the vote for releasing Apache Twill
0.7.0-incubating passed with 3 binding +1s and no 0 or -1.
Binding +1s:
Henry Saputra
Justin Mclean
Patrick Hunt
Thanks to all who helped the release.
The Apache Twill Team
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Justin Mcle
For the sake of all of these discussions, are "bundled dependencies" and
"work derived from other projects source code" 100% equivalent? In many
cases we've copied (or ported) small bits of code from other projects and
believe them to be 'derived work' from a copyright standpoint. My
assumption is
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Todd Lipcon wrote:
> Yea, even after this thread I'm not entirely sure on whether copyright
> statements need to be duplicated from original source files into NOTICE or
> not.
Copyright statements on their own within a source file? They do not.
> For example, Su
Yea, even after this thread I'm not entirely sure on whether copyright
statements need to be duplicated from original source files into NOTICE or
not. For example, Subversion's LICENSE file mentions the 'linenoise'
library and its copyrights, but its NOTICE file doesn't. Not sure if this
is an erro
+1
As someone who just went through the process of figuring out the LICENSE and
NOTICE files and am still unclear. I agree with JB - examples would be
great.
Regards,
Roberta
-Original Message-
From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré [mailto:j...@nanthrax.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Hi Renaud and Bertrand,
No worries Bertrand ! And thanks Renaud ;)
Regards
JB
On 01/26/2016 04:19 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
Bonjour Renaud,
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Renaud Richardet wrote:
...Please add me to “Additional Interested Contributors” section as well
I've done
Bonjour Renaud,
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Renaud Richardet wrote:
> ...Please add me to “Additional Interested Contributors” section as well
I've done this, happily! (JB I hope you don't mind).
(I know Renaud for quite some time and I think he can make great
contributions to Dataflow
Bonjour,
Please add me to “Additional Interested Contributors” section as well.
I am an Apache UIMA committer, and would like to use Dataflow to process
large amounts of text [1]. I just started a POC [2] and really like the API
so far.
Thanks, Renaud
[1] https://github.com/BlueBrain/bluima
[2
On 1/26/16, 12:07 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> In this email [4], Sebb recommends mentioning non-ASF Apache-licensed
>> bundled dependencies in LICENSE.
>
>I think you are misrepresenting Sebb here but I'll let him clarify if
>need be.
>
>The case you refer to the file in question was a
Hi all,
I submit Apache Unomi 1.0.0-incubating release to your vote (take 2, new
tentative fixing src distributions and NOTICE file).
A vote was held on developer mailing list and it passed with +1s.
Vote thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-unomi-dev/201601.mbox/%3C569
Hi Justin,
Starting from the licensing howto
(http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice), and
regarding what you said, it's not obvious to me, and a bit confusing.
Maybe, we can enhance a bit the licensing howto to be more "straight
forward", using some existing examples to i
Hi,
> LICENSE lists the licenses of bundled software that require it. Apache
> licensed software doesn’t require that. [1]
I should clarify that’s only in the case when the software is already under an
Apache license. Basically there’s no need to list the license twice.
Thanks,
Justin
Hi,
> In this email [4], Sebb recommends mentioning non-ASF Apache-licensed
> bundled dependencies in LICENSE.
I think you are misrepresenting Sebb here but I'll let him clarify if need be.
The case you refer to the file in question was a binary file whose license
wasn’t obvious. When adding on
27 matches
Mail list logo
