@Matt yes the licensing is a blocker unfortunately, so we should cancel the RC and start an RC1 vote once this is fixed. I should have properly voted in the earlier email, but will do it now.
-1 (binding) due to the licensing On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 5:47 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > -1 (non binding) > > I'm sorry Matt, but the LICENSE is not correct in the source > distribution: it contains reference to gradle, parquet, etc. > So, the LICENSE is probably a copy from iceberg java. I suggest to > start from "regular" LICENSE and add the go section. > > The rest looks good: > - NOTICE is OK > - hash and signature are OK > - ASF header present > > Regards > JB > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 11:12 PM Matt Topol <zotthewiz...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I would like to propose the following release candidate (RC0) of Apache > Iceberg Go version v0.1.0. > > > > This release candidate is based on commit: > adc8193de3299b04c9763c2fba529a7b94d080ce [1] > > > > The source release rc0 is hosted at [2]. > > > > Please download, verify checksums and signatures, run the unit tests, > and vote on the release. See [3] for how to validate a release candidate. > > > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > > > [ ] +1 Release this as Apache Iceberg Go v0.1.0 > > [ ] +0 > > [ ] -1 Do not release this as Apache Iceberg Go v0.1.0 because... > > > > Thanks! > > --Matt > > > > [1]: > https://github.com/apache/iceberg-go/tree/adc8193de3299b04c9763c2fba529a7b94d080ce > > [2]: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-go/releases/v0.1.0-rc0 > > [3]: > https://github.com/apache/iceberg-go/blob/main/dev/release/README.md#verify >
