Members present: wastl, westei, jfrank, wikier ---------------- Meeting summary: ----------------
1. Preface a. http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause (wastl, 1) b. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html (wastl, 1) c. http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause (wikier, 1) d. write a protocol for adding new dependencies (wikier, 1) e. http://wiki.apache.org/marmotta/DependenciesProtocol (wikier, 1) -------- Actions: -------- - write a protocol for adding new dependencies (wikier, 09:24:09) IRC log follows: # 1. Preface # 09:06:39 [wikier]: what AndyS pointed by email is good 09:06:54 [wikier]: actually, what details do we need to take care? 09:07:09 [wikier]: list them would be nice 09:07:24 [wastl]: the two licensing issues he is mentioning 09:07:55 [wastl]: the checklist is mostly done, I think, but it is good to have. Maybe we should put it into a file somewhere 09:08:03 [wastl]: the build instructions are actually in the README 09:08:41 [wastl]: after doing the release, we should create a step-by-step guide, some things are e.g. covered by the Maven release plugin 09:08:54 [wastl]: (like the clean build of the source repo tag) 09:09:09 [wikier]: aja 09:09:32 [wikier]: and, form the technical point of view, do we have anything else open? 09:09:47 [wikier]: for instance, I'd like to fix MARMOTTA-153 during the morning, but this is a minor issue 09:10:32 [wastl]: most things are more feature than bug 09:10:54 [wastl]: even MARMOTTA-153 is kind of a feature 09:11:02 [wikier]: yes 09:11:17 [wikier]: that why I said is minor 09:11:54 [wikier]: westei: Fabian is not online, isn't it? 09:12:24 [westei]: no he is offline (IRC and Skype) 09:12:47 [westei]: you might want to have a look at http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/stanbol/trunk/releasing/ 09:13:02 [westei]: the check** scrips are really helpful in validating releases 09:13:48 [wikier]: I think is New BSD 09:14:12 [wikier]: no, BSD 2-Clause License 09:14:32 [wastl]: ah yes 09:14:33 [wastl]: true 09:14:49 [wastl]: so then it is not necessary to put in the NOTICE 09:15:26 [wikier]: right 09:15:39 [wikier]: AndyS: do you agree? 09:16:02 [wastl]: #link http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause 09:16:54 [wastl]: and for reference how to use 09:17:02 [wastl]: #link http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html 09:17:50 [jfrank]: the source repository of the oxbow/ezware stuff on googlecode links to BSD 3-Clause license 09:18:02 [wastl]: we have the link to the license already in LICENSE.txt 09:18:11 [wastl]: @jfrank: so their header is inconsistent with their license file 09:18:18 [wastl]: but in both cases it should be ok 09:18:26 [westei]: this is typical 09:18:47 [westei]: came a lot of LGPL projects where source headers are mostly APL ^^ 09:19:32 [westei]: I think whats counts are the LICENSE included in the distribution 09:19:40 [wikier]: westei is right, is BSD 3-Clause License 09:19:47 [wikier]: anyway, same situation 09:19:57 [wikier]: #link http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause 09:20:17 [wastl]: BSD 3-clause is the "New BSD" license and for us unproblematic 09:20:32 [wastl]: it just requires a pointer in the LICENSE.txt file 09:20:54 [wikier]: well, copying code is always conflictive 09:20:57 [wikier]: but... acccording to http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps 09:21:04 [wastl]: ok, what else is needed? 09:21:39 [wastl]: to ensure that noone will accidently add a file (1) without license, (2) without proper license, or (3) without documentation in form of a comment 09:21:41 [wikier]: add it to LICENSE 09:21:55 [wastl]: I will add the rat and checkstyle plugins to the builkd 09:22:02 [wikier]: "Under normal circumstances, there is no need to modify NOTICE." 09:22:09 [wastl]: wikier: it is already there, of course :-P 09:22:24 [wastl]: what do you think I spent my last week with :-P 09:22:56 [wastl]: but as I said - since I won't spend another week for a release - everyone will need to take care of his contributions in the future 09:23:02 [wastl]: no proper license - no contribution 09:23:25 [wikier]: +1 09:23:40 [wastl]: but we need Jenkins for this 09:23:46 [wikier]: so every new dependency may need to follow a strict workflow 09:23:46 [wastl]: perhaps we should ask at INFRA 09:24:09 [wikier]: #action write a protocol for adding new dependencies 09:24:24 [wastl]: yes, and I will try to check and track all changes to the pom files 09:24:39 [wikier]: wastl: I'll push about INFRA-5887 09:26:24 [westei]: The problem is that even a minor version upgrade of a dependency might change the used license. So while a protocol for new dependencies will tackle most of the issues it will not cover everything. 09:26:49 [westei]: So the release manager will always need to check licenses of dependencies changed since the the last release 09:27:02 [wikier]: so the protocol may need to cover dependencies updates too 09:27:49 [westei]: if you require to have versions of external dependencies in the parent pom.xml, than the problem is limited to released of the parent 09:30:09 [wikier]: aja 09:30:17 [wikier]: draft created at the wiki 09:30:25 [wikier]: #link http://wiki.apache.org/marmotta/DependenciesProtocol 09:32:27 [wikier]: see MARMOTTA-162 09:33:33 [wikier]: I agree wastl: it's easier to track when adding than all together when preparing a release 09:33:39 [wikier]: do we all agree? 09:34:11 [jfrank]: +1 09:34:17 [westei]: +1 09:34:47 [westei]: In Stanbol I usually create own issues when I update major dependencies (e.g. Solr, Tika â¦) 09:36:11 [wastl]: +1 09:37:04 [wikier]: westei: this could be part of the protocol 09:37:09 [wastl]: the policy should be that everyone who adds a new dependeny, adds a 3rd party source code, or increases the version number of a dependency needs to check the license and update the N&L files 09:37:26 [wikier]: I see three situation which may need a jira issue: 09:37:32 [wikier]: 1) new dependency 09:37:40 [wikier]: 2) major version update 09:38:02 [wikier]: 3) code importation, arguing why 09:38:28 [wikier]: and 3 may additional require a mid-term plan to maintain.drop this case 09:38:34 [wikier]: maintain/drop 09:39:02 [wastl]: not necessarily, some code parts are simply small libraries not worth publishing as Maven artifact 09:39:10 [wastl]: like the SwingBits used by marmotta-splash 09:40:17 [wikier]: so having an issue which documents why would be great fmpov 09:40:24 [wastl]: yes 09:40:32 [wastl]: maybe we require 09:40:40 [wastl]: 3a) 3rd party source moves always in src/ext 09:40:56 [wastl]: 3b) the src/ext file contains a README describing what and why 09:43:01 [jfrank]: at that place could also be snippets to be added to N&L (if required) 09:43:46 [wikier]: +1 09:44:24 [wikier]: I'll prepare a draft during the morning, addressing all these things, and then we can discuss it at dev@marmotta 09:44:57 [wikier]: contributions from wastl may be required, since he develop the release building tasks 09:46:09 [wastl]: yes nop 09:47:27 [wikier]: ok, let's more forward 09:47:54 [wikier]: so, from my understanding, the last release snapshot looks fine? 09:48:31 [wikier]: the checklist AndyS sent is quite good for checking: 09:48:31 [wikier]: is the GPG signature fine? 09:48:31 [wikier]: is there a source archive? 09:48:31 [wikier]: can the source archive really be built? 09:48:31 [wikier]: is there a correct LICENSE and NOTICE file in each artifact (both source and binary artifacts)? 09:48:31 [wikier]: does the NOTICE file contain all necessary attributions? 09:48:32 [wikier]: check the dependencies. 09:48:39 [wikier]: do all the tests work? 09:48:39 [wikier]: if there is a tag in the SCM, does it contain reproduceable sources? 09:49:10 [wastl]: GPG signature is fine as long as I am signing - it has been fine since 1998 :) 09:49:24 [wastl]: source archive: yes 09:49:31 [wastl]: can be built: yes 09:49:46 [wastl]: L&N: yes, for all artifacts 09:50:09 [wastl]: attributions: to the best of my knowledge yes 09:50:32 [wastl]: dependencies: are ok 09:50:54 [wastl]: tests work: yes (now tested also in other countries :-P) 09:51:01 [wastl]: tag in SCM: handled by release plugin 09:51:12 [wikier]: so... 09:51:31 [wikier]: that's it 09:51:31 [wikier]: :-) 09:52:16 [wastl]: yes 09:52:18 [westei]: every that votes with +1 should check this for himsef 09:52:24 [westei]: everyone 09:52:33 [jfrank]: well, we've again 3 issues open for 3.0 09:53:15 [wastl]: MARMOTTA-153 will be handled by Sergio 09:53:32 [wastl]: 154 is minor, I can take care of it 09:53:45 [wastl]: 160 might be less funny 09:54:00 [wikier]: MARMOTTA-154 actually could be moved to 3.1 09:54:09 [wikier]: my mistake 09:54:47 [wikier]: so... 2 09:54:48 [wikier]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MARMOTTA/fixforversion/12323952 09:55:24 [wikier]: I'll continue with MARMOTTA-153 09:55:46 [wastl]: I'll add a basic checkstyle configuration 09:56:16 [wikier]: +1 09:56:16 [jfrank]: volunteers for MARMOTTA-160? I've no time 09:56:17 [wikier]: since at the end mentors could not attend this meeting, let's move the discussions to the mailing list 09:56:56 [wikier]: I can try, as soon as I'd solve MARMOTTA-153 09:57:54 [wikier]: wastl: please, answer AndyS's mail (Re: New Marmotta Release Candidate (for checking)) with the checklist replies 09:58:24 [wikier]: so then, we can discuss and check meanwhile we solve those minor issues 10:03:48 [wikier]: thomas is offline xD 10:03:54 [wikier]: ok, let's close for today
