I intentionally didn’t read all the other vote emails as I wanted to do this
unbiassed … so please forgive for repeating to report things.
+1 (for the source-release) / -1 for the binary distribution (binding)
The source-release looks quite good (except the version set in the “hadoop”
module and some minor issues)
The binary distribution looks empty … it doesn’t seem to contain any jars at
all … guess this is not how it should be?
Details:
* Signatures (ASC) (src and bin) ok and relate to apache email address: OK
* SHA512 hashes match (src and bin): OK
* Source Bundle:
* LICENSE, NOTICE, README, RELEASE_NOTES exist in source bundle: OK
(However I would prefer the binary versions not to be included)
* check the contents of LICENSE, NOTICE, README.md, RELEASE_NOTES.md
* LICENSE: Path of MavenDownloaderWrapper.java is wrong
* NOTICE: Year in the notice could need updating … we’re no longer
2018
* NOTICE: IANAL but: I don’t think the source bundle actually
includes crypto code. If it’s just a dependency, it doesn’t need to be listed.
* NOTICE: What does the “SE” in “an open-source Java SE” mean? Should
this be “SW” or better “software”?
* README.md: When building a Java JRE might not be enough … a JDK
could be required (Not checked)
* README.md: Should add the possibility of downloading the source
bundle from the website
* README.md: The structure of the project isn’t as described in the
file (Line 84ff)
* README.md: Couldn’t find bin/start-server.sh or .bat (Line 104ff)
same applies for the start-client.sh or .bat
* README.md: Could not build according to maven command as there is
no “iotdb” module (After a check in the history, I noticed there was some
renaming … used “server” instead and that worked).
* README.md: Build output looks different due to renaming (Line 130ff)
* REDEME.md: Structure of output looks different (server/iotdb
instead of iotdb/iotdb) and later on there’s no “bin” direcrtory (line 144ff)
* README.md: Should we link to downloads at the domain tsfile.org
(Line 156)
* README.md: Could not build client due to renaming (used “client”
instead of “iotdb-cleient” (Lines 201ff)
* README.md: Stopped validating the content in detail after being
able to login to the local server with the cli :-)
* RELEASE_NOTES: Just saying it’s incompatible with 0.7.0 is a little
frustrating as someone using it will have to find out the changes himself …
that can frustrate people.
* RAT check results OK
* Search for SNAPSHOT:
* Dockerfile references SNAPSHOT
* Documentation references SNAPSHOTS
* docs/Documentation-CHN/UserGuide/8-Tools-Grafana.md
* docs/Documentation/UserGuide/8-Tools-Grafana.md
* grafana/readme.md
* grafana/readme_zh.md
* Module “hadoop” references parent in version “0.8.1-SNAPSHOT”
* Bin bundle:
* Unpacking in the same directory wasn’t possible as it tries to unpack
in the same directory as the source-release …
* LICENSE-binary, NOTICE-binary, README.md, RELEASE_NOTES.md exist in
binary bundle: OK (However I would prefer them to be called LICENCE and NOTICE
as tools like Nexus check for contents of the default names … it will not find
the ones with the “-binary” suffix)
* check the contents of LICENSE-binary, NOTICE-binary, README.md,
RELEASE_NOTES.md
* LICENSE-binary: The binary doesn’t contain any source files (…
therefore mentioning the Hive files can be removed
* LICENSE-binary: The binary doesn’t contain the maven-wrapper …
therefore this mention can be removed
* LICENSE-binary: The binary release doesn’t contain any binary files
(no jars etc.) therefore I don’t think we need to technically list anything
(But I guess it’s more an issue that there is no jar in there … )
* NOTICE-binary: Same year issue as with the Source NOTICE
* NOTICE-binary: As the binary distribution doesn’t seem to contain
any binary content, I can’t really verify this
* README.md: Can’t verify as the binary distribution doesn’t work
* RELEASE_NOTES.md: Same issues as in the source bundle
Am 27.07.19, 09:10 schrieb "Jialin Qiao" <[email protected]>:
Hi,
Thanks, I submit a PR[1] to update the copyright of MIT and BSD licenses.
The licenses and related software licenses are as follows (I update the
copyright according to these urls.):
MIT License
------------
org.slf4j:slf4j-api [2]
me.tongfei:progressbar:0.7.3 [3]
BSD 2-Clause
------------
jline:jline:2.14.5 [4]
BSD 3-Clause
------------
org.antlr:antlr-runtime:3.5.2 [5]
[1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-iotdb/pull/318/files
[2] https://github.com/qos-ch/slf4j/blob/master/slf4j-api/LICENSE.txt
[3] https://github.com/ctongfei/progressbar/blob/master/LICENSE
[4] https://jline.github.io/jline2/license.html
[5] https://www.antlr.org/license.html
Best,
--
Jialin Qiao
School of Software, Tsinghua University
乔嘉林
清华大学 软件学院
> -----原始邮件-----
> 发件人: "Justin Mclean" <[email protected]>
> 发送时间: 2019-07-27 11:59:35 (星期六)
> 收件人: [email protected]
> 抄送:
> 主题: Re: [VOTE] Apache IoTDB (Incubating) 0.8.0 RC1
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for fixing all of those minor things.
>
> >> - Most permissive licenses say the full text of the license needs to
be included, that includes the copyright line for BSD and MIT licensed
software, I’m not sure that have generic license test in license covers that.
> >
> > Actually, we have a "licenses" folder under the root which contains
full text of the licenses.
>
> Except it doesn’t have the actual licenses fro each bit of software just
some generic ones. With ALv2 it doesn’t;t matter, but with BSD and MIT it does
due to the copyright line.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
