I have 796e2438fafac3510938c1f987fadd27eef6c063, but it doesn't appear to be tagged. Maybe the tag still needs to be pushed or something? Regarding the binary files, I don't think they can be included in a src-only tarball.
Going down the release checklist ( http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list), it looks as though we're okay on most of the points, but we're missing the disclaimer, the filenames don't have "incubating" in them (I've seen other podlings handle this by adding -incubating to the version number, e.g. 3.1.0-incubating), and the release doesn't consist only of source code. good - 1.1 Checksums and PGP signatures are valid. good - 2.1 Build is successful including automated tests. still need to address - 3.1 DISCLAIMER is correct, filenames include "incubating". see below - 3.2 Top-level LICENSE and NOTICE are correct for each distribution. good - 3.3 All source files have license headers where appropriate. good - 3.4 The provenance of all source files is clear (ASF or software grants). good - 3.5 Dependencies licenses are ok as per http://apache.org/legal/ release contains compiled code - 3.6 Release consists of source code only, no binaries. Regarding the LICENSE and NOTICE, in htrace-hbase/src/main/webapps/static we have d3.min.js, bootstrap-theme.min.css and bootstrap.min.css. d3 is BSD-licensed and bootstrap is MIT-licensed, so these should be mentioned in the LICENSE file, presumably with the entire text of their licenses since we're using the minimized versions ( http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps). In htrace-zipkin/src/main/thrift we have scribe.thrift and zipkinCore.thrift that seem to be from Zipkin. Since Zipkin is Apache-licensed and has a NOTICE file, I think we need to copy the first couple of lines to our NOTICE (e.g. Zipkin is a distributed tracing system. Copyright 2012 Twitter, Inc. -- we can leave out the optional dependencies listed in their NOTICE). Regarding the projects currently mentioned in the NOTICE file: junit - we don't actually bundle this, do we? can we remove it from the notice? levigo and kingpin - MIT licensed, so should be mentioned in LICENSE instead of NOTICE units - I'm a little concerned about this one since the license is undetermined -- what if it's made GPL? On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sorry for the delay; I'm just getting back from vacation and am taking a > > look now. Do we have a KEYS file? > > > No. Was thinking this a TODO for when we move RC to release. > > > > > Is there a tag for the release > > > > Yes (Pull down tags to your local repo and see its tagged 3.1.0RC4 at > 796e2438fafac3510938c1f987fadd27eef6c063 We made a 3.1 branch soon after). > > > > candidate? The tarball doesn't quite match what is in git, so how is the > > tarball created from the tag? > > > Checkout the tag and then do: > > $ mvn clean install assembly:single > > I'll write up how-to-RC soon. > > > > Also are the binary files in > > htrace-core/src/go/bin intended to be in the tarball? I'll check over > the > > license and notice information as well. > > > > > Yes. They are there right? > > Thanks Billie, > St.Ack >
