I changed the subject, is it not showing up in the email on your end? IMO option 1 with changing email subject keeps everything in one thread and is easier navigate.
> On 16 Aug 2026, at 21:22, Jernej Frank <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Regards, > Jernej Frank > >>> On 16 Aug 2026, at 20:44, Stefan Krawczyk <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> Remember to create a [Result][Vote] subject email with that summary. Either >> reply to this one and change it, or create a new email with the result. I >> guess we should standardize on which one. Perhaps the former is the simpler >> one? >> >>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2026 at 1:30 AM Jernej Frank <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> adding my +1 as well. >>> >>> The vote to release Apache Burr (Incubating) 0.43.0 RC1 has passed. >>> >>> The vote result is: >>> +1: 3 binding >>> - Stefan Krawczyk >>> - Jarek Potiuk >>> - Elijah ben Izzy >>> - Jernej Frank >>> >>> +1: 1 non-binding >>> - Viquar Khan >>> >>> +0: 0 >>> -1: 0 >>> >>> Vote thread: >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/okv20r6v8f31qobgqvpqvqvgn1h5kj5c >>> >>> Thank you to everyone who reviewed and voted. I will now request approval >>> from the Incubator PMC. >>> >>> On behalf of the Apache Burr PPMC, >>> Jernej Frank >>> >>> On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 5:42 PM vaquar khan <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>> >>>> *Validated from source:* >>>> >>>> - Release branch and RC tag point at the same clean commit, no drift >>>> past what was put up for vote. >>>> - Source tree is clean: no node_modules, no built UI assets, no stray >>>> binaries or archives. The single burr/example symlink is tracked in >>> git >>>> and >>>> legitimate. >>>> - LICENSE, NOTICE, and DISCLAIMER are present. LICENSE-wheel carries >>> the >>>> generated third-party section covering the bundled npm packages, and >>> the >>>> license-generation check runs in CI, so the list won't drift silently >>> on >>>> the next dependency bump. This addresses the RC0 blocker. >>>> >>>> I did not re-verify the artifact checksums or GPG signatures; the binding >>>> voters have already covered that. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Viquar Khan >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 11:38 PM Elijah ben Izzy < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 (binding) >>>>> >>>>> Checked: >>>>> - 9 artifacts, SHA512 + GPG all verify (Jernej's key, in KEYS) >>>>> - Source matches tag v0.43.0-incubating-RC1 (971a3530); RAT 0 >>> unapproved >>>> on >>>>> src >>>>> - LICENSE / NOTICE / DISCLAIMER present in src, sdist, wheel >>>>> - Re-checked the RC0 blocker: LICENSE-wheel covers all 130 npm packages >>>> in >>>>> the Vite bundle, all Cat-A (MIT/BSD-3/ISC/Apache-2.0/PSF), no Cat-X. >>>>> Independently spot-verified Jarek's 4 "legit absence" claims >>>>> (micromark-util-symbol, highlight.js, prismjs, reactflow sub-packages) >>>> plus >>>>> the top-20 by prominence -- all accounted for. MPL/CC-BY hits in >>>>> LICENSE-wheel are attribution text inside react-icons' own MIT license; >>>> no >>>>> react-icons subpackage is imported in the UI src and zero Ci*/Fa* hits >>> in >>>>> the shipped bundle. Not distributed. >>>>> - generate_wheel_license.py --check runs in release-validation.yml -- >>>> won't >>>>> drift silently on next dep bump. >>>>> - Fresh venv install of the wheel works: import burr, burr --help, >>>> tracking >>>>> server serves the Vite bundle (index-D7mZX6DE.js + index-CCnzmWxs.css) >>> at >>>>> HTTP 200. >>>>> >>>>> Non-blocking follow-ups for a later release (nothing here needs a new >>>> RC): >>>>> - Sdist filename apache-burr-0.43.0-incubating-sdist.tar.gz breaks the >>>>> PEP-517 <name>-<version>.tar.gz convention -- pip install <url> won't >>>> infer >>>>> the version. Worth reverting or calling out in the announce. >>>>> - Sdist ships without .rat-excludes -- RAT on sdist flags 21 demo >>>> log.jsonl >>>>> + 2 already-MIT-attributed deep-researcher .py. Ship .rat-excludes in >>>> sdist >>>>> next time, or add headers. >>>>> - burr.__version__ attribute missing; only >>>>> importlib.metadata.version("apache-burr") works. Minor DX. >>>>> - 3 duplicate "opentelemetry ... already instrumented" warnings on >>> server >>>>> start. Cosmetic. >>>>> >>>>> Stefan's #882 covers the earlier non-blockers. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks Jernej -- good turnaround on RC0. >>>>> >>>>> Elijah >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 4:03 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hello Jernej, >>>>>> >>>>>> [X] +1 Release this as Apache Burr 0.43.0 (binding) >>>>>> [ ] +0 >>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... (reason required) >>>>>> >>>>>> Checklist: >>>>>> [X] Download links are valid >>>>>> [X] Checksums and signatures are valid >>>>>> [X] LICENSE/NOTICE/DISCLAIMER files exist and are correct >>>>>> [X] No unexpected binary files in source >>>>>> [X] All source files have ASF headers >>>>>> [X] Can build and test from source >>>>>> >>>>>> I gave a binding -1 on RC0 over the wheel's LICENSE not accounting >>> for >>>>> the >>>>>> npm packages bundled into the compiled tracking UI. RC1 fixes that >>>>>> properly, >>>>>> so I am +1 here. >>>>>> >>>>>> On the LICENSE fix specifically, since it was the blocker: >>>>>> >>>>>> - LICENSE-wheel now carries a generated "THIRD-PARTY COMPONENTS >>> BUNDLED >>>>> IN >>>>>> THIS BINARY DISTRIBUTION" section listing 130 npm packages with >>> their >>>>>> licenses and copyright lines. Licenses are Apache-2.0, >>> BSD-3-Clause, >>>>> ISC, >>>>>> MIT and PSF -- no Category X. >>>>>> - It is generated, not hand-maintained: >>>> scripts/generate_wheel_license.py >>>>>> derives the list from a `vite build --sourcemap` run, resolving >>> each >>>>>> node_modules source back to its owning package. That is the right >>> way >>>>> to >>>>>> do this, and it is the part that makes me confident it will not >>>>> silently >>>>>> drift on the next dependency bump. >>>>>> - `generate_wheel_license.py --check` runs in CI >>>>>> (.github/workflows/release-validation.yml), so a stale list fails >>> the >>>>>> build rather than costing another RC. >>>>>> - All 130 listed entries match telemetry/ui/package-lock.json >>> versions >>>>>> exactly, and none of them is a dev-only dependency. >>>>>> - I spot-checked the packages that look like they *should* be in the >>>> list >>>>>> but are not -- micromark-util-symbol, highlight.js/lowlight, >>> prismjs, >>>>>> @floating-ui/core, reactflow, react-router-dom, character-entities >>> -- >>>>> by >>>>>> grepping the shipped minified bundle for their distinctive string >>>>>> literals. Each absence is legitimate: micromark ships >>> constant-folded >>>>>> builds so its symbol package contributes no code, the UI imports >>>>>> { Prism as SyntaxHighlighter } so the highlight.js path is >>>> tree-shaken >>>>>> out, and the rest are type-only or re-export-only. The list is >>>>> accurate, >>>>>> not merely plausible. >>>>>> >>>>>> The rest of my verification: >>>>>> >>>>>> - All three SHA-512 checksums verify, and all three detached >>> signatures >>>>> are >>>>>> good against the KEYS file at >>>>>> https://downloads.apache.org/incubator/burr/KEYS, signed by Jernej >>>>>> Frank, >>>>>> 3959 450E 4AA8 9991 1547 112F 25CA 7FC3 4D7C 68C1. >>>>>> - The signed tag v0.43.0-incubating-RC1 (object 30f4a9aa, commit >>>>> 971a3530) >>>>>> matches the tag on GitHub. The source tarball is byte-identical to >>>> that >>>>>> tag: 820 files, every SHA-256 equal. >>>>>> - No compiled objects, archives or built UI assets in the source >>>>> artifact. >>>>>> The single symlink (burr/examples -> ../examples) is present in git >>>>> too. >>>>>> - scripts/check_asf_headers.py reports clean. >>>>>> - `twine check` passes on the wheel and the sdist, and the project's >>>> own >>>>>> verify_apache_artifacts.py signatures/artifacts checks pass on all >>>>> three >>>>>> artifacts. >>>>>> - Python test suite from the source tarball on 3.12: 665 passed, 5 >>>>> skipped. >>>>>> The two Ray tests did not run in my sandbox (Ray wants /tmp/ray and >>>>> unix >>>>>> sockets); that is my environment, not the release. >>>>>> - The released wheel installs cleanly, reports 0.43.0, and the core, >>>>>> tracking and server modules import with the relevant extras. >>>>>> >>>>>> Two cosmetic follow-ups for a later release, on top of the ones >>> Stefan >>>>>> already raised in #882: >>>>>> >>>>>> - scripts/README.md's policy table says tests ship in the sdist, but >>>> the >>>>>> sdist has no tests/ directory. They are in the voting src.tar.gz, >>> so >>>>> the >>>>>> artifacts are fine -- it is the doc that is out of step. >>>>>> - verify_apache_artifacts.py's `signatures` command reports FAIL for >>>>> every >>>>>> non-artifact file that happens to sit in the directory it scans (it >>>>>> flagged the KEYS file I had downloaded alongside the artifacts as >>>>>> "missing .asc"). Worth filtering to the expected artifact names so >>>>> voters >>>>>> do not see spurious failures. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for turning RC0 around quickly. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jarek >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
