OK, I thought I could run that from the root. LGTM
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > Brock, > > What directory were you in when attempting to do the build of the assembly? > > The 'assembly' directory is where the good stuff is at. > > So from root you can do: > > mvn -T2.0C clean install > cd assembly > mvn assembly:assembly > cd target > cd nifi.../nifi.... > > if you do './bin/nifi.sh start' then nifi will explode out all the jars and > such. You can then go to ./work > > Do something like 'find -type f| grep jar' to get a listing of all jars. > > Thanks > joe > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Brock Noland <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Based on what I see, this looks really good. I was going to just spot > check > > the libraries included in your binary build but got the error below. > > > > The only thing I would add is add a check to validate this as part of > your > > release process. > > > > Brock > > > > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal > > org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-assembly-plugin:2.5.2:assembly > (default-cli) > > on project nifi-parent: Error reading assemblies: No assembly descriptors > > found. -> [Help 1] > > > > On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Mentors, > > > > > > I believe based on completing analysis of the all of our dependencies > and > > > their related licenses that we should now be considered complete for > the > > > following two incubation items categorized as 'Verify Distribution > > Rights': > > > > > > *** > > > 1). Check and make sure that for all code included with the > distribution > > > that is not under the Apache license, we have the right to combine with > > > Apache-licensed code and redistribute. > > > 2). Check and make sure that all source code distributed by the project > > is > > > covered by one or more of the following approved licenses: Apache, BSD, > > > Artistic, MIT/X, MIT/W3C, MPL 1.1, or something with essentially the > same > > > terms. > > > *** > > > > > > I believe the analysis of all of our dependencies and research into all > > of > > > their applicable copyrights, licenses, etc. that we have covered these > > > requirements. The analysis included all code for which we've developed > > > direct dependent code as well as those we depend on transitively. The > > > results of that analysis have concluded in the current LICENSE file > > > included with our build as found here: > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-nifi/blob/develop/LICENSE > > > > > > We have licenses which are consistent with those called out in > > > http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a > > > > > > We have the following license dependencies from the list known as > > 'Category > > > A' > > > - BSD (2-clause) > > > - BSD (3-clause) > > > - MIT > > > > > > We have the following license dependencies from the list known as > > 'Category > > > B' > > > - CDDL 1.0 > > > - CDDL 1.1 > > > - MPL 2.0 > > > - EPL 1.0 > > > > > > And a few dependencies listed as 'public domain'. > > > > > > We have no dependencies listed from the disallowed list. During the > > > analysis it revealed three dependencies which did violate the rules but > > > those have been addressed in NIFI-183. > > > > > > I believe the LICENSE and NOTICE files have been updated appropriately. > > > > > > With your permission I'd like to consider these as resolved (though we > do > > > recognize that we have to keep these up to date). > > > > > > Thank you > > > Joe > > > > > >
