Thanks Patrick for reviewing! I do have some questions.
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Aaron. Great first pass. > > I'm -1 at the moment. In general things look good however I noticed > the following issues > > 1) RAT identified a large number of files with licensing issues (see > attached) > > You can run the rat tool (http://creadur.apache.org/rat/) manually via: > java -jar ~/apache-rat-0.10/apache-rat-0.10.jar . > ../rat.txt > (run it on both your source and binary artifacts) > > I see that the RAT plugin is included in pom.xml, but for some reason > it's not being validated as part of the build? That should be fixed. > Ok, should I add an exclude for each of the 3rd party script (or script like) files in the exclude list? Meaning things like jquery js and css files that are under a different license and should be accounted for in the LICENSE file. Also since the docs/site/ in all generated by maven can I exclude those from rate as well? Or do I need to setup a site header to add the license? I assume there is a way to do that. > > 2) the many image files that are included (source artifact), are they > under compatible licenses? Or are they images the project created? > I will look into them. I see that most of them are assets in the blur-console contrib, so I will have to defer to Chris Rohr on what they are and how they were created he is the expert there. There are a couple in the docs that are screenshots that I created. > > 3) your README should mention Apache prominently > > 4) the license/notice for the src repo looks ok. however the binary > has an issue. Binary releases are a pain to get right and maintain. > For example see section 4d from the apache license, as applied to > derivative works (you are including 3rd party code - i.e. jars): > > (d) If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its > distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must > include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained > within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not > pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one > of the following places: .... > So just to clarify, for each derivative work that has a NOTICE file I need to include that NOTICE file in the blur binary artifact? Can place the NOTICE file beside the jar in the lib directory? > > One way around this is if the jar you are including itself has the > NOTICE file - in the case of hadoop-core jar that's not the case and > you need to handle. > Does this mean if the jar that Blur depends on contains a NOTICE within it then it's handled? Or am I just confused? > > 5) I would recommend naming the directory of the source artifact > distinct from the binary artifact. Perhaps > apache-blur-0.2.0-incubating-src and apache-blur-0.2.0-incubating > respectively. (optional though, just makes folks lives easier if they > d/l and extract both) > Agreed. Thanks again! Aaron > > > Patrick > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > > This is the first release candidate for Apache Blur, version > > 0.2.0-incubating. > > > > It fixes the following issues: > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12324255&styleName=Html&projectId=12313721 > > > > *** Please download, test and vote by [3 working days after sending]. > > > > Note that we are voting upon the source (tag), binaries are provided for > > convenience. > > > > Source and binary files: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/blur/0.2.0-incubating/ > > > > The tag to be voted upon: > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-blur.git;a=tag;h=5c177eb8c27bfd6238f31dc781043c9c29d69021 > > > > Blur's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release: > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/blur/0.2.0-incubating/KEYS >
