+1 (binding) - verified signature and checksum - built from source with JDK17 + Maven 3.8.6 - verified that JARs were built with Java 11 - checked no binaries in src - checked git tag - verified CI run is green - reviewed web PR
Regarding the top level NOTICE, I agree with Robert. If this RC passes the vote we can move on with the release as is, but it should definitely be fixed before the next release. Cheers, Ferenc On Friday, June 12th, 2026 at 19:57, Robert Metzger <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Checked: > * jar file contains good looking pom.xml file, notice file, license file > * signature and sha checksum matches on the source and staged jar > * no binaries in the source only TLS test fixtures under > src/test/resources/security/certs > * build is passing > > *What worries me is this:* > > The source release's top-level NOTICE, after the standard Apache header, > contains an ISC license grant: > > Permission to use, copy, modify, and/or distribute this software for any > purpose with or > without fee is hereby granted... THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE > AUTHOR DISCLAIMS > ALL WARRANTIES... > > - This is a license grant, which per ASF policy must not be in a NOTICE > file, and it corresponds to no bundled code (the release only ships ASL-2.0 > deps). > - git log shows it's a leftover from the GetInData donation (commit > 330d0b49, "Initial contribution of Getindata connector") that was never > cleaned up. > > The problem with the ISC license is that it grants full distribution rights > to the source code, while the ASL imposes conditions (retain notices, > patent related clauses). > Read literally, those are different terms for the same software, which is > contradictory and confusing to a recipient trying to determine their > rights/obligations. > However, the ASL states in §4(d): "The contents of the NOTICE file are for > informational purposes only and do not modify the License.". So this is not > ideal, and should be addressed with the next release .. or if there's > another RC, but I believe it is ok. > > > On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 12:12 PM Nic Townsend <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > +1 from me, excited to get this into the care and guidance of the community > > > > -- > > Nic Townsend > > IBM Event Processing > > Architect / Senior Engineer > > Slack: @nictownsend > > Bluesky: @nict0wnsend.bsky.social > > From: David Radley <[email protected]> > > Date: Friday, 22 May 2026 at 09:01 > > To: dev <[email protected]> > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [VOTE] Release flink-connector-http v1.0.0, release > > candidate 2 > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > Please review and vote on release candidate #2 for flink-connector-http > > v1.0.0, 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], which are signed with the key with fingerprint > > 2ECD889C401949E2A5983B9CCE17B7AC19C920DA [3], > > > > * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4], > > > > * source code tag v1.0.0-rc2 [5], > > > > * website pull request listing the new release [6]. > > > > * CI build of the tag [7]. > > > > > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by majority > > approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > David > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/FLINK/versions/12356355 > > > > [2] > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flink/flink-connector-http-1.0.0-rc2/ > > > > [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/flink/KEYS > > > > [4] > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflink-1915/ > > > > [5] https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-http/releases/tag/v1.0.0-rc2 > > > > [6] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pull/831 > > > > [7] > > https://github.com/apache/flink-connector-http/actions/runs/26238712460 > > > > > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN > > > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN > > >
