Thanks Chris! On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Chris Rohr <[email protected]> wrote:
> I just pushed up a commit that replaces tagmanager.js with selectivity.js > (MIT license). I've removed all traces of tagmanager and updated the > LICENSE file. > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 1:20 PM Chris Rohr <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Garrett, thanks for reference, however, the existing functionality > doesn't > > actually do anything in regards to building the queries for faceting. > It's > > purely a UI control to build up the pieces to facet on in a tagging like > > interface. > > > > On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:57 AM Garrett Barton <[email protected] > > > > wrote: > > > >> Facetjs? Theres two out there with that name though. > >> On Jul 20, 2015 8:47 AM, "Chris Rohr" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > I can help take a look at an alternative. It is used for building up > >> > facets in the search portion of the console. > >> > > >> > On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:09 PM Tim Williams <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Justin noticed in our RC that we include tagmanager.js, which is > >> > > category B. I'm not sure what role it plays in the console - anyone > >> > > know of an alternative to it's functionality under an acceptable > >> > > license? > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > --tim > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > >> > > From: Justin Mclean <[email protected]> > >> > > Date: Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 8:01 PM > >> > > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Blur version 0.2.4-incubating RC1 > >> > > To: [email protected] > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) until the MPL issue can be resolved / > >> > > explained, other issues can be fixed next release. For the MPL issue > >> > > it may be that "For small amounts of source that is directly > consumed > >> > > by the ASF product at runtime in source form” may apply. [2] > >> > > > >> > > For the source release I checked: > >> > > - filename contains incubating > >> > > - signatures and hashes good > >> > > - DISCLAIMER exists > >> > > - LICENSE has minor issues + MPL issue [2] > >> > > - NOTICE good > >> > > - Some unexpected binaries in source (see below) > >> > > - All source file have headers > >> > > - Can compile form source? > >> > > > >> > > LiCENSE is missing: > >> > > - MIT licensed normalize.css (see > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > ./apache-blur-0.2.4-incubating-src/blur-console/src/main/webapp/public/css/blurconsole.css > >> > > + > >> > > > >> > > >> > ./apache-blur-0.2.4-incubating-src/blur-console/src/main/webapp/libs/bootstrap/less/normalize.less) > >> > > - MIT/BSD licensed polyfill (see ./docs/resources/js/respond.min.js) > >> > > > >> > > There is an issue with > >> > > ./blur-console/src/main/webapp/libs/tagmanager/tagmanager.js as this > >> > > is MPL licensed [2] which is weak copy left and considered a > category > >> > > B license. In this case it looks like it isn’t been handled > correctly > >> > > as it being included in source not binary form. I’m not sure how > this > >> > > should be handled given there is no compiled JS form. > >> > > > >> > > There are a couple of test files that contain compiled code, can > this > >> > > be produced via the build process? > >> > > > ./blur-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/blur/command/test1/test1.jar > >> > > > ./blur-core/src/test/resources/org/apache/blur/command/test2/test2.jar > >> > > > >> > > Something a little odd that caught my eye is all of the > >> > > ./distribution/src/main/resources-hadoop1/notices/*.jar.src files. > Is > >> > > there any reason for these files to be in the source release? It > look > >> > > that they are used to generate the binary NOTICE file? > >> > > > >> > > For the binary release you may want to check the LICENSE as it is > >> > > identical to the source release [3]. For the binary NOTICE file a > >> > > minor issue in that there is no need to repeat "This product > includes > >> > > software developed by The Apache Software Foundation “ [4]. > >> > > > >> > > Re compiling from source some instructions in the README would be > >> > > helpful as it seems a mvn install in the top directory may not do > what > >> > > is expected. (As far as I can see it seems to be doing a rat check > and > >> > > nothing else?) > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Justin > >> > > > >> > > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep > >> > > 2. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b > >> > > 3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary > >> > > 4. > http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
