Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Livy 0.8.0-incubating (RC1)

HI, There are GPL and LGPL licensed jars in the zip. I'm not sure but I thought we couldn't include jars with category X licenses in our binary distributions. It could be that Category X licenses are only a problem with Source Releases. They are an issue with binary rel

Re: Feedback requested - How to deal with retired podling resources

Hi, I’m not sure what happen to that page or why it doesn’t exist. It did recenly: https://web.archive.org/web/20230327140005/https://incubator.apache.org/guides/retirement.html Justin

Re: Feedback requested - How to deal with retired podling resources

In regard to assets, I see no particular reason to treat retired podlings differently from graduated podlings. Keep the foo.apache.org hostname; retain the repository (read-only); keep the website (tagged with a notice ’This podling has retired. It may be contacted at …

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Livy 0.8.0-incubating (RC1)

+1 (binding) The source release seems fine. * incubating in name * signing and checksums are ok * LICENSE/NOTICE/DISCLAIMER are ok * source files have ASL headers * maven build works The binary zips seem ok but it would be nice to do something with the THIRD-PARTY file in future releases. On Mon

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Livy 0.8.0-incubating (RC1)

Yea, last time that file was updated was 4 years ago - I don't even seen any uses of ldapsdk in the code and last time it was included as part of apache-ds-integ dependency. Running through current dependency tree now to see if it's still there. On 2023/07/31 18:51:36 PJ Fanning wrote: > I've

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Livy 0.8.0-incubating (RC1)

I've had a closer look and it looks like THIRD-PARTY file is including license info for jars that you don't even ship. It seems that you actually have no problematic jars except perhaps that ldapsdk jar. This issue is worth reading. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-160 I've raised thi

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Livy 0.8.0-incubating (RC1)

Thank you for the detailed report, will take a look! On 2023/07/31 18:10:21 PJ Fanning wrote: > I had a look at your binary zip. There is a problem with the > thirdparty license. I raised this. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LIVY-981 > > There are GPL and LGPL licensed jars in the zip

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Livy 0.8.0-incubating (RC1)

I had a look at your binary zip. There is a problem with the thirdparty license. I raised this. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LIVY-981 There are GPL and LGPL licensed jars in the zip. I'm not sure but I thought we couldn't include jars with category X licenses in our binary distributions.

[VOTE] Release Apache Livy 0.8.0-incubating (RC1)

Hello Incubator Community, The Apache Livy has recently been working on reviving the Livy project and would like to call for a vote to release Apache Livy(Incubating) version 0.8.0-incubating-rc1. We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this incubator release. Communit

Feedback requested - How to deal with retired podling resources

Hi incubator folks, over at Infra, we occasionally have requests to retire podlings, and while we do have a specific set of policies for TLPs, it gets a bit vague when it comes to podlings. I have tried looking for the IPMC's own guidelines, but it seems that the retirement guide does not exist