> On Jan 10, 2018, at 5:52 PM, Tal Liron wrote:
>
>> Would a version like "1.9.0.incubating" be feasible?
>>
>
> I appreciate the creative idea. :) But it's very non-standard and not with
> the spirit of what the version string is for. The "official" document on
> versioning is this:
>
> http
> Would a version like "1.9.0.incubating" be feasible?
>
I appreciate the creative idea. :) But it's very non-standard and not with
the spirit of what the version string is for. The "official" document on
versioning is this:
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0440/
You are allowed string specif
>
> My comment about the dependency on GPL code has yet to be answered, so
> I don't think you can claim compliance yet.
>
AriaTosca does not have a dependency on any GPL code.
The particular YAML file we are talking can be used by AriaTosca users to
spin up new virtual machines in the cloud some
> On Jan 10, 2018, at 5:29 PM, Tal Liron wrote:
>
> The Python package name does not contain the version. In Python tooling
> (setuptools, distutils, pip) you specify the dependency as a combination of
> a package name and a version qualifier (specific, list, range, etc.).
>
> (There are a few
The Python package name does not contain the version. In Python tooling
(setuptools, distutils, pip) you specify the dependency as a combination of
a package name and a version qualifier (specific, list, range, etc.).
(There are a few rare exceptions in which the version number becomes part
of the
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 7:53 PM Tal Liron wrote:
> The line mentioned is not in NOTICE. The line is specifically a comment in
> a file used to download/install a 3rd party product on the cloud. I truly
> think we are in the clear here.
>
> Re: Python packaging. Apache Airflow is also in incubatio
On 11 January 2018 at 00:52, Tal Liron wrote:
> The line mentioned is not in NOTICE. The line is specifically a comment in
> a file used to download/install a 3rd party product on the cloud.
OK, then my comment about the NOTICE file contents was not relevant here.
> I truly think we are in the c
Hi,
+1 (binding)
I checked:
- incubating in name
- hashes and signatures good
- DISCLAIMER exists
- LICENSE good and NOTICE OK (see below)
- no unexpected binary files
- All ALv2 source files have ASF headers
For the NOTICE don’t forget to update the year to be the current one and
there’s no ne
The line mentioned is not in NOTICE. The line is specifically a comment in
a file used to download/install a 3rd party product on the cloud. I truly
think we are in the clear here.
Re: Python packaging. Apache Airflow is also in incubation and also, like
AriaTosca, does not have the "-incubating"
On 10 January 2018 at 17:10, Tal Liron wrote:
> John, the line is relevant. The service template in question is used to
> install and deploy Clearwater IMS.
The NOTICE and LICENSE files are ONLY for files that are actually
included in the release archive.
> I believe users should know what they
Hi,
> We kindly request a review and vote on this RC3 version.
You should ask your mentors to vote as they will be IPMC members.
Thanks,
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional c
> On Jan 10, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> That tarball and wheel file you are looking at are not Apache
>> distributions, but rather Python packages. Are you sure they need to have
>> "-incubating" in the name?
>
> This seem fairly clear on what’s required. [1] What do o
Hi,
> That tarball and wheel file you are looking at are not Apache
> distributions, but rather Python packages. Are you sure they need to have
> "-incubating" in the name?
This seem fairly clear on what’s required. [1] What do other IPMC members think?
Thanks,
Justin
1. https://incubator.apach
John, the line is relevant. The service template in question is used to
install and deploy Clearwater IMS. I believe users should know what they
are installing.
I don't know if we can include a suffix easily, and wonder why need to
change it now -- it will make it harder for users to upgrade if th
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:35 AM Tal Liron wrote:
> Hi Justin,
>
> Project Clearwater is GNU GPLv3, however it is not included in this
> distribution. These two files are Apache licensed. The line you quote is
> merely informational.
>
That line should be removed, as it is not relevant to the rel
Thanks again,
We addressed all the issues. (the developer specific subpage will be
created later, we don't have enough content, yet. We plan to add more
documentation in the next phase.).
If no more suggestions/objections we will restart the vote on the ratis
dev list.
Thanks your help,
Ma
16 matches
Mail list logo
