On 17/08/16 19:59, Ellison Anne Williams wrote: > Thanks guys. > > I will make another set of L&N files (other than what's in the root of PR > 53) for the source-only release artifacts and figure out where to place > them based on the previous comments. I will add them to PR 53, so let's not > merge yet (I will change the status to WIP)...
Please see my other note, and let's put the source L&N at root, and the binaries into a subdirectory for use during building. > I want to make sure that we follow the correct ASF procedures for L&N files > (whatever time that it takes) and get it as 'right as possible' with the > first release. You're doing a fantastic job! I know this is real pain to do, especially as it doesn't have a technical impact, but it is important. As you can see even many top level projects are not doing it right (yet). Consumers of Pirk need a clear picture of what they are receiving and their obligations, so thank you for stepping up to sort it out! Regards, Tim > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Every artifact needs L&N files, so the source release zip and jars all need >> their own L&N. Perhaps the L&N would be the same for the zip and >> source-only jars (depending on the exact contents), while the exe jar would >> need a different L&N. >> >> I believe the assembly plugin only creates the zip, and some other plugin >> creates the jars. Possibly the jar plugin, or the remote resources plugin >> might be involved (based on the comment in the parent pom: >> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/pom/trunk/asf/pom.xml). Either way, >> it seems like changing the plugin configuration might not be necessary to >> modify L&N in jars; we may just be able to drop in the L&N in a META-INF >> directory in src/main/resources or src/main/appended-resources (as in the >> examples linked in Joe's and my previous emails). As for the source release >> zip, the L&N from the main project directory will be used. >> >> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Ellison Anne Williams < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> From the discussion, although this seems to be somewhat murky ASF ground, >>> it seems that we need two sets of L&N files: >>> >>> 1.) L&N files to accompany executable jars, which include the transitive >>> L&N requirements dictated by the build (this is what our L&N files >> reflect >>> in PR 53) >>> >>> 2.) L&N files to accompany source-only jars, which, in our case, would >>> really include only 'our' ASL L&N as we aren't distributing anything else >>> but our source >>> >>> Is this correct? >>> >>> If so, from Billie's comments, it seems that we can accomplish this via >>> configuring our maven assembly plugin. We can make a 'assembly' >> directory, >>> include the source-only L&N files there, and configure accordingly. Is >> this >>> an acceptable practice? >>> >>> >>> >>> P.S. -- When I downloaded the NiFI source release here >>> https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua?path=/nifi/1.0.0- >>> BETA/nifi-1.0.0-BETA-source-release.zip >>> and checked the LICENSE and NOTICE files, I see the same files as in the >>> master branch on github -- am I completely missing something here? >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> It looks like it is also possible to have >>>> src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/LICENSE and >>>> src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/NOTICE that will be appended to >> the >>>> default. See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3990 and >>> these >>>> examples: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/accumulo/tree/master/server/ >>>> monitor/src/main/appended-resources/META-INF >>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/tree/master/hbase- >>>> thrift/src/main/appended-resources/META-INF >>>> >>>> This is for jars; it's also easy to adjust L&N for assemblies (tars and >>>> zips) because you're explicitly listing files to include in the >> assembly >>>> spec. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Tim Ellison <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 17/08/16 16:08, Ellison Anne Williams wrote: >>>>>> I'm seeing the same LICENSE and NOTICE files used throughout NiFi - >>>> even >>>>> in >>>>>> the nifi-assembly directory which is referenced here >>>>>> https://nifi.apache.org/licensing-guide.html >>>>> >>>>> FWIW the LICENSE I see in "nifi-1.0.0-BETA-source-release.zip" is >>> quite >>>>> different to that in "nifi-1.0.0-BETA-bin.tar.gz". So they have >>> figured >>>>> it out. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Tim >>>>> >>>>>> Joe - Am I missing something here? >>>>>> >>>>>> I would echo Suneel and ask if (1) it is really a strict >> requirement >>>> for >>>>>> our sources jar and/or (2) if we are interpreting it correctly. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Suneel Marthi < >>>> [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Tim Ellison < >>> [email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 17/08/16 11:40, ellisonanne wrote: >>>>>>>>> Github user ellisonanne commented on a diff in the pull request: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pirk/pull/65# >>>>>>>> discussion_r75099656 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --- Diff: LICENSE --- >>>>>>>>> @@ -199,4 +199,64 @@ >>>>>>>>> distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS >> IS" >>>>>>> BASIS, >>>>>>>>> WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either >>> express >>>>> or >>>>>>>> implied. >>>>>>>>> See the License for the specific language governing >>>>> permissions >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> - limitations under the License. >>>>>>>>> \ No newline at end of file >>>>>>>>> + limitations under the License. >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> +============================= >> ============================== >>>>>>>> ============ >>>>>>>>> +Apache Pirk (incubating) Subcomponents: >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> +The Apache Pirk project contains subcomponents with >> separate >>>>>>>> copyright >>>>>>>>> +notices and license terms. Your use of the source code for >>> the >>>>>>> these >>>>>>>>> +subcomponents is subject to the terms and conditions of the >>>>>>>> following >>>>>>>>> +licenses. >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> --- End diff -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm confused - how do we create different LICENSE and NOTICE >> files >>>>>>>>> for the different jars when they are built via the release >> plugin? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm guessing it requires some pom foo beyond my feeble >> capabilities >>>> :-( >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am not sure how u can package/not package license files in >>> different >>>>>>> artifacts. >>>>>>> If this is a strict requirement, a good chunk of TLPs today are in >>>>>>> violation of this. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Should we have Justin McLean or John D. Ament from IPMC review our >>>>>>> artifacts now? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Besides stating the obvious that : >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (1) we'd store the source LICENSE and NOTICE file in the project >>>>>>>> repository root, and place in there only the required information >>> for >>>>>>>> code we are hosting in our repo and including in the source.jar. >>> For >>>>>>>> Pirk as it is today, that will be a plain ALv2 text and simple >>>> notice. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> (2) we'd then have alternative LICENSE and NOTICE files for the >>>>>>>> convenience "exe" JAR in a subdirectory that are used to replace >>> the >>>>>>>> top-level files when building the binaries. This would refer to >>> the >>>>>>>> license/ directory containing the full text of the 3rd-party >>>> licenses. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Maybe our friends from Apache NiFi can explain what they do, as >>> they >>>>>>>> have the correct information in their release guide [1], and they >>> are >>>>>>>> Maven-based too. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A number of other projects I peeked into don't seem to be doing >> the >>>>>>>> right thing IMHO. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] https://nifi.apache.org/licensing-guide.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
