Hi Ate,

we can certainly add a NOTICE file, but I’m confused about the policy 
documentation here.
The Licensing How-to [1] points to the "Source Header and Copyright Notice 
Policy” [2] (I guess that’s the source of truth on the subject …), which states 
that 
  "Every Apache distribution should include a NOTICE file in the top directory”
and the license [3] says
  “If the Work includes a NOTICE text file as part of its distribution […]”.
Also, I didn’t find anything on the requirement of a NOTICE file in [4].
If the NOTICE is always required, it seems that policy [2] should state
  “Every Apache distribution MUST include a NOTICE file in the top directory"

Any idea why that’s not the case or where the actual requirement is codified?

Thanks,
Till

[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html 
<http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html>
[2] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html 
<http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html> 
[3] http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 
<http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>
[4] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html 
<http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html>

> On Sep 9, 2015, at 2:54 AM, Ate Douma <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi team,
> 
> Sorry for chiming in so late, and to be clear I haven't had time to do an 
> actual review of the release candidate(s) yet.
> 
> But one specific issue is I think important to point out concerning "we don't 
> need the NOTICE file".
> 
> For ASF releases a NOTICE file is ALWAYS required, and as a minimum "includes 
> a copyright and attribution statement for The Apache Software Foundation".
> 
> For further info, and everything related/required for a incubator release, 
> see:
> - http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
> - 
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-license
> - 
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#best-practice-notice
> 
> And for ASF release policy requirements in general:
> - http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
> 
> I'll try to find hopefully some time later this week for a proper review from 
> a policy/requirements perspective (I cannot attest to have the technical 
> knowledge (yet) for a functional validation/review).
> 
> Regards, Ate
> 
> 
> On 2015-09-03 11:57, Till Westmann wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sep 1, 2015, at 8:06 PM, Ian Maxon <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Please vote
>>> [ ] +1 release this package as Apache AsterixDB Hyracks 0.2.16-incubating
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion regarding package release
>>> [X] -1 do not release this package because …
>> 
>> Most things look good:
>> - hashes ok
>> - signature ok
>> - DISCLAIMER ok
>> - no unexpected binary files
>> - all source files have headers
>> - archive agrees with tag
>> 
>> However I think that
>> 1) we don’t need the NOTICE file as we don’t include source code that 
>> requires a notice and
>> 2) we need to add the MIT license for jsplumb 
>> (https://jsplumbtoolkit.com/license), jquery (https://jquery.org/license/), 
>> and flot (https://github.com/flot/flot/blob/master/LICENSE.txt).
>> Looking at http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps I 
>> think that we should just add those to the LICENSE file.
>> For both of these points I wouldn’t mind to get some feedback, if I didn’t 
>> get it right :)
>> 
>> Also, I think that it would be good to
>> 1) include the git commit in the vote e-mail as the tag can be modified and
>> 2) trim the list of RAT excludes to
>>     algebricks/algebricks-tests/src/test/resources/results
>>     
>> hyracks/hyracks-control/hyracks-control-cc/src/main/resources/static/javascript
>>     
>> hyracks/hyracks-control/hyracks-control-cc/src/main/resources/static/stylesheet
>>     hyracks/hyracks-dist/src/main/resources/conf
>>     hyracks/hyracks-hdfs/hyracks-hdfs-core/src/test/resources/data
>>     hyracks/hyracks-hdfs/hyracks-hdfs-core/src/test/resources/expected
>>     hyracks/hyracks-storage-am-common/src/main/resources
>>     (at least that would have covered all the files that don’t have a 
>> license in my RAT report for the unzipped source archive)
>> 3) ensure that “mvn package" runs through with tests.
>>     For me the hyracks-integration-tests failed as apparently the data files 
>> are missing. One of the execution I saw was
>>       java.io.FileNotFoundException: data/tpch0.001/orders-part1.tbl (No 
>> such file or directory)
>>     Unfortunately, I don’t know why those are not added to the source 
>> archive.
>> 
>> Till
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to