Ed, +1 to that idea. Ranger component is technically optional and I think
we should release without it and resolve that in the next version. This
will keep the momentum going ...

Thanks


On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 12:22 AM Ed Espino <[email protected]> wrote:

> Roman,
>
> If we cannot resolve the Ranger licensing issues in a reasonable timeframe,
> do you feel it would be helpful to provide the HAWQ optional Ranger support
> in a subsequent convenience binary release?  The project is learning a
> considerable amount on the binary release process. To keep the project
> momentum, I feel it will help to complete the HAWQ C/C++ and PXF components
> at this point.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -=ed espino
>
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 7:48 AM, Ruilong Huo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Hi Roman,
> > >
> > > Please let us know if you have a chance to review the java components
> for
> > > pxf and ranger and share with your feedback. Thanks.
> >
> > Yes I have. Here's what I found out:
> >    1. For PXF all you have to do at this point is to make sure that each
> > JAR/WAR
> >        files that gets shipped has LICENSE, NOTICE and DISCLAIMER
> embedded
> >        in its META-INF/ folder in the JAR itself. Given that PXF doesn't
> > seem
> >        to bundle any extra bits -- that should get you clear for JARs
> >
> >    2. For Ranger plugin it gets more complicated. I will start by
> > making sure that all
> >        the JAR/WAR files that are produced by HAWQ itself get the same
> > treatment
> >        as PXF does in #1. That still won't get you off the hook though
> > for RPMs, because
> >        it seems that RPMs re-ship a LOT of dependencies. For those
> > dependencies I'd
> >        recommend having a build script that extracts LICENSE, NOTICE
> > and DISCLAIMER
> >        (if any) from all the bundled JARs/WARs (things under
> > plugin-service/lib for example)
> >        and places them in a special folder within the RPM itself.
> >
> > So as long as you do that and make sure that LICENSE, NOTICE and
> DISCLAIMER
> > find their way into all of the RPMs (regardless of whether they
> > contain C/C++ binaries
> > of JARs/WARs) you should be good for your next release.
> >
> > Makes sense?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Ed Espino*
>

Reply via email to