+1 (binding)

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 5:26 PM Dan Halperin <[email protected]>
wrote:

> My reading of the LEGAL threads is that since we are not including (shading
> or bundling) the ASL-licensed code we are fine to distribute kinesis-io
> module. This was the original conclusion that LEGAL-198 got to, and that
> thread has not been resolved differently (even if Spark went ahead and
> broke the assembly). The beam-sdks-java-io-kinesis module is an optional
> part (Beam materially works just fine without it).
>
> So I think we're fine to keep this vote open.
>
> +1 (binding) on the release
>
> Thanks Aljoscha!
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Yep, I was looking at those same threads when I reviewing the artefacts.
> > The release was already close to being finished so I went through with it
> > but if we think it's not good to have them in we should quickly cancel in
> > favour of a new RC without a published Kinesis connector.
> >
> > On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 at 20:46 Dan Halperin <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I can't tell whether it is a problem that we are distributing the
> > > beam-sdks-java-io-kinesis module [0].
> > >
> > > Here is the dev@ discussion thread [1] and the (unanswered) relevant
> > LEGAL
> > > thread [2].
> > > We linked through to a Spark-related discussion [3], and here is how to
> > > disable distribution of the KinesisIO module [4].
> > >
> > > [0]
> > >
> > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/staging/
> > org/apache/beam/beam-sdks-java-io-kinesis/
> > > [1]
> > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6784bc005f329d93fd59d0f8759ed4
> > 745e72f105e39d869e094d9645@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
> > > [2]
> > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-198?
> > focusedCommentId=15471529&page=com.atlassian.jira.
> > plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15471529
> > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-17418
> > > [4] https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/15167/files
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Seetharam Venkatesh <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 2:30 PM Aljoscha Krettek <
> [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Team!
> > > > >
> > > > > Please review and vote at your leisure on release candidate #1 for
> > > > version
> > > > > 0.3.0-incubating, as follows:
> > > > > [ ] +1, Approve the release
> > > > > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific
> comments)
> > > > >
> > > > > The complete staging area is available for your review, which
> > includes:
> > > > > * JIRA release notes [1],
> > > > > * the official Apache source release to be deployed to
> > dist.apache.org
> > > > > [2],
> > > > > * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [3],
> > > > > * source code tag "v0.3.0-incubating-RC1" [4],
> > > > > * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API
> > > > reference
> > > > > manual [5].
> > > > >
> > > > > Please keep in mind that this release is not focused on providing
> new
> > > > > functionality. We want to refine the release process and make
> stable
> > > > source
> > > > > and binary artefacts available to our users.
> > > > >
> > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by
> > majority
> > > > > approval, with at least 3 PPMC affirmative votes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Aljoscha
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > > >
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> > > > projectId=12319527&version=12338051
> > > > > [2]
> > > > >
> > >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/beam/0.3.0-incubating/
> > > > > [3]
> > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/staging/
> > > > org/apache/beam/
> > > > > [4]
> > > > >
> > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-beam.
> > git;a=tag;h=
> > > > 5d86ff7f04862444c266142b0d5acecb5a6b7144
> > > > > [5] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/52
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to