One thing to consider (you don’t have to do this). If you make the release
candidate from a branch, then you don’t need to wait for pull requests to be
approved. And you can squash, revert mistaken changes and so forth before
pushing to master. The push to master can happen after the vote has passed.
Julian
> On Apr 16, 2018, at 8:41 AM, Jonas Pfefferle <peppe...@japf.ch> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I updated the pull request:
> * Removed the copyright notice and moved it to NOTICE file
> * Added license header to README.md and HISTORY.md
>
> I will create a new rc as soon as someone approves the changes.
>
> Thanks,
> Jonas
> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:08:37 +0200
> "Jonas Pfefferle" <peppe...@japf.ch> wrote:
>> Hi Julian & Luciano
>> Thanks for all the comments. This cancels the vote. I will make the needed
>> changes, create rc1 and start the a new vote.
>> Jonas
>> On Sat, 14 Apr 2018 10:17:14 -0700
>> Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Apologies that I still haven't reviewed the release. I've been
>>> travelling this week. And now I'm home I'm a parent.
>>> I agree with Luciano about headers (including .md files), md5
>>> checksums, and running tests.
>>> Definitely remove all copyright notices from files; they should have
>>> been removed during donation. I'm not sure that they even need to go
>>> into NOTICE. NOTICE is for code included in the release (i.e. via
>>> copy-paste if it is a source-only release) and we try to keep NOTICE
>>> absolutely minimal. (Why? Because we require our consumers to include
>>> our NOTICE in their release, so we are placing a burden on our
>>> consumers, and their consumers ad infinitum.)
>>> It appears that this vote has failed, so Jonas as RM, please send a
>>> "[CANCEL] [VOTE] Crail v1.0-rc0 source release" email. (Note:
>>> strictly, a release vote passes if it has 3 more +1s than -1s,
>>> therefore this COULD theoretically pass, but a RM uses his/her
>>> discretion to decide whether a release is viable, and may cancel the
>>> vote early if it is clear that another iteration is needed.)
>>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 8:55 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 4:03 AM, Jonas Pfefferle <peppe...@japf.ch> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Luciano
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for reviewing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I fixed all the license issues and added rat to the pom file so that you
>>>>> can run:
>>>>> mvn apache-rat:check
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Great, thanks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> to verify the build. I excluded all md files. I looked around other Apache
>>>>> project and I couldn't find any which put a license header in the md
>>>>> files.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You can add license to markdown like this:
>>>>
>>>> <!--
>>>> {% comment %}
>>>>
>>>> Add license contents here
>>>>
>>>> {% endcomment %}
>>>> -->
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I also fixed the LICENSE file which I believe was copied from Spark and
>>>>> had lots of unnecessary licenses in them.
>>>>> All these fixes are currently in this pull request:
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-crail/pull/20
>>>>> We will merge this soon.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Good, please make sure you also remove IBM copyright from all files (and
>>>> maybe move to NOTICE file)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Regarding the tests: most of the unit tests cannot be run without a Crail
>>>>> config resp. a running Crail namenode/datanode. I propose to disable these
>>>>> tests by default and make a build flag to enable them.
>>>>> This way people don't have to use skipTests when building Crail.
>>>>> What do you guys think?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's documented on the readme that you should run with skipTests, so it
>>>> should be ok one way or another.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure about the md5 files. I see many Apache and other open source
>>>>> projects including them. If you feel strongly about this I will not
>>>>> provide
>>>>> them with the next rc.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here is a recent discussion about md5 files
>>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/general@incubator.apache.org/msg63139.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jonas
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 08:54:05 -0700
>>>>> Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rat shows many files without a license, please add headers to all files
>>>>>> that accept comments such as .java, .pom, .md, etc
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The LICENSE file, for a source only distribution, should only incorporate
>>>>>> what is shipped with the package. The current license seems lime would
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> been a good one for a binary distribution. In summary, if a package or
>>>>>> file
>>>>>> is not present in the source distribution, don't list it in the license
>>>>>> file.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Build runs with skipTest, but mvn clean package fails
>>>>>> with java.io.FileNotFoundException: null/conf/crail-site.conf (No such
>>>>>> file
>>>>>> or directory)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, looks like recently best practice is to not add .md5 files to
>>>>>> distribution, due to its fragilities.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:33 AM, Jonas Pfefferle <peppe...@japf.ch>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I packaged the source and updated the history for our first source
>>>>>>> release.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this release.
>>>>>>> You can read the release notes here:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-crail/blob/master/HISTORY.md
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The commit to be voted upon:
>>>>>>> https://git1-us-west.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-crail.
>>>>>>> git;a=commit;h=9f5cfd33316346e159aaaed109abe686762310e0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Its hash is 9f5cfd33316346e159aaaed109abe686762310e0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The artifacts to be voted on are located here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/crail/1.0-rc0/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The hashes of the artifacts are as follows:
>>>>>>> source.tar.gz.md5 28dbb1ae6b15acf2314c97dfd310b438
>>>>>>> source.tar.gz.sha256 e8c2b09f2928443c42083f6717c60a
>>>>>>> 6190a17ddde8d01dc48ecabd80bfb7d30e
>>>>>>> source.zip.md5 8ecef0be5b3363cef6f7fe6a3e053426
>>>>>>> source.zip.sha256 b958374bba99c246424153cdd517b0
>>>>>>> 4dd8831715b69f62531bf7eaed1aba1055
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
>>>>>>> https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/pepperjo.asc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Crail 1.0 incubating.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote is open for the next 72 hours and passes if a majority of
>>>>>>> at least three +1 PMC votes are cast.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Crail 1.0 incubating
>>>>>>> [ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with the release
>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because...
>>>>>>> Here is my vote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jonas
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Luciano Resende
>>>>>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
>>>>>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Luciano Resende
>>>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975
>>>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
>
