Thank you very much Julian. I mainly wonder where on earth that font comes from since we're not using it anywhere.
As for rat exclusions: are there any particular file formats besides .java files that need an Apache license header? We'd be happy to add them elsewhere. The shell scripts perhaps as they support comments? We could even add them to the SVG filed even though it will probably blow up memory consumption unless we code the comments out of the file loads somehow. Perhaps it's easier to just look at other projects and ask which files need a header? Cheers, Matt Op za 19 dec. 2020 00:22 schreef Julian Hyde <[email protected]>: > I’m voting -1 due to .gz format, lack of hashes in vote email, icomoon.ttf > GPL file not mentioned in LICENSE. There are other issues noted below that > are not show-stoppers for this release. > > However, this is a really good first RC. What I checked: > > Checked signature and KEYS. > > I tried to unzip the tarball using "tar xvfz > apache-hop-0.50-incubating-rc1.tar.gz” and got an error "gzip: stdin: not > in gzip format”. The tar file is not compressed! So the “.gz” suffix is a > lie. (If you had compressed it, it would be 16M rather than 93M.) I > successfully unzipped using ""tar xvf > ~/apache/dist/dev/incubator/hop/apache-hop-0.50-incubating-rc1/apache-hop-0.50-incubating-rc1.tar.gz”. > > The tar unzips to the directory ‘apache-hop-0.50-incubating-rc1’. You > should probably change the directory name to '‘apache-hop-0.50-incubating’ > (because you never know which RC will become the release, and you don’t > want to redo the vote). > > Checked that contents of tar match commit b1c60b119. > > Checked NOTICE, DISCLAIMER, LICENSE. > > I note that there are EPL files in this release. This is acceptable at > this stage of incubation, but must be removed next release. > > Icomoon font (icomoon.ttf) is GPL. Must be included in LICENSE this > release, and removed next release. Need to check licensing of other binary > files (difficult because of the large number of apache-rat exclusions). > > FtpClient.java has a header that indicates dual-licensed LGPL and Apache. > We need to revisit that header next release. > > LICENSE says "Eclipse Public License 1.0 (EPL) For details, see > licenses/LICENCE-EPL10”; the file’s name is actually > "licenses/LICENSE-EPL10”. > > Checked README.md (not as a web page, but as the instructions that tell me > what is in the tarball and how to build it). It needs to more clearly state > that Hop is an incubating Apache project. Build instructions don’t say how > to build from a tarball, but are otherwise nice and clear. Successfully ran > ‘mvn clean install -DskipTests’ on Ubuntu, Oracle JDK 1.8.0_271. > > I ran rat, ‘mvn apache-rat:rat -debug’. It succeeded. But I’m concerned > about the very large number of exclusions. What do others think? Do we need > to pare down the exclusions this release, or next? > > Julian > > > > > On Dec 16, 2020, at 10:30 AM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Francois, > > > > I'd say those kinds of loose ends are not a problem at this point. > > This is the first RC and there's a very high probability that it will > > not be the last. Let's focus on the contents of the release (tar ball, > > vote email, release notes), and the loose ends can be cleared up after > > the release. > > > > Hoppers, > > > > The release title should be "Apache Hop release 0.50 (incubating)". > > Which kind of indicates that the release is of "incubating" quality. > > Use that title throughout the vote email. > > > > Vote emails must include the hashes of the artifacts to be inspected. > > This is so that we can be certain that the artifacts being inspected > > by reviewers are the same as those being released and are the same as > > those received by anyone who downloads the release. > > > > That is, put the line > > > > > 888f6c654cd5495725a56f0e0901cfcacaec56dd2173d2d9d63f592fdaf80a69296d4857e90a3b4d440455732618d4aa5b38e97382b72ecc2b225ba6b4b1e421 > > apache-hop-0.50-incubating-rc1.tar.gz > > > > in the vote email. > > > > Further comments when I have time later today. > > > > Julian > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 9:13 AM Francois Papon > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I can see some issues always "in progress" in the Jira version: > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HOP/versions/12349247 > >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HOP/versions/12349247> > >> > >> you have to resolved them if they are done or postpone to the next > version. > >> > >> regards, > >> > >> François > >> [email protected] > >> > >> Le 16/12/2020 à 17:34, Hans Van Akelyen a écrit : > >>> Hi All, > >>> > >>> This is our first release under the Apache flag, this release will be a > >>> source code only release. > >>> Build instructions can be found in the README included. > >>> > >>> The tag to be voted on is 0.50-rc1 (commit b1c60b1): > >>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-hop/commit/b1c60b1191d8a28c716fa192b8b2e67f4d2e700e > >>> > >>> The release files, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found at: > >>> > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/hop/apache-hop-0.50-incubating-rc1/ > >>> > >>> Release artifacts are signed with the following key: > >>> > https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9a8a628dd4f4aa1e > >>> > >>> For more information about the contents of this release, see: > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/HOP/versions/12349247 > >>> > >>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Hop 0.50! > >>> > >>> The vote is open for 72 hours and passes if > >>> a majority of at least 3 +1 PMC votes are cast. > >>> > >>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Hop 0.50 > >>> [ ] +0 No opinion > >>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... > >>> > >
