On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 6:12 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Thanks for the feedback! >> > >> > >> > On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> I see a number of NOTICE files in the source artifact. e.g. >> >> >> >> >> ./distribution/src/main/resources-hadoop1/notices/jetty-6.1.26.jar.NOTICE >> >> >> >> I don't believe you should be including these given the artifact >> >> doesn't include those jars. I'm not sure what to make of this... >> >> >> > >> > These *.NOTICE files are a part of the source distro because we use them >> > plus the embedded script to generate the NOTICE file for the binary >> > artifact. It it enough to explain there existence or do we need to >> rename >> > them there extension to something else? >> > >> >> Honestly, I'm not sure (haven't seen this before with recent incubator >> projects). I'd just be concerned re confusion... Perhaps one of the >> other mentors can comment, my concern may be unwarranted. >> >> Given this is a release tool (iiuc) and not part of blur itself, >> perhaps it would be better to move this elsewhere? Into it's own >> subdirectory separate from the project "source"? >> >> e.g. cassandra keeps it's logo in the svn repository, but it's >> separate from the released "source": >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/cassandra/ >> > > What if we kept them in the source repo, but removed them from the source > artifact upon release? Only the combined binary NOTICE is needed to create > the binary artifact from the source artifact. We really only need those > files when we need to add or change the binary NOTICE file. > > What are people's thoughts on this?
I'd just renaming them to something that can't reasonably be confused with a formal NOTICE and move on rather than redo packaging and all. > Also is this something that should hold up this release? I don't view this as a blocker. > Should we start the vote over considering that the mail list issues of last > week? Yes, I think some momentum was lost with the mail issues and a vote restart would help. --tim
