L & N files usually differ between source and binary distributions. Usually due to shading, contents of lib directory, etc. Source distributions are simpler, since they can’t contain any binaries. For a binary distribution, the L & N files need to reflect everything in the binary dependencies.
I think it’s important that we review licensing issues, so I’ll cancel this RC. Kudos to Stig for paying attention to license hygiene! -Taylor > On Mar 25, 2019, at 1:21 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Maybe something like this? https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2980 > > Den man. 25. mar. 2019 kl. 14.12 skrev Stig Rohde Døssing < > [email protected]>: > >> The ASF guideline says the file "should identify the third-party product, >> its licensing, and a url to the its homepage". If we can get away with >> including the license name and not the license text, I think >> THIRD-PARTY.txt contains what we need. E.g. Spark also only lists the >> license names, and not the texts. >> >> We can clean up the output a bit more, e.g. collapse all the Apache >> licenses together under one header, I just didn't bother because I didn't >> expect the file to be user facing. >> >> Den man. 25. mar. 2019 kl. 13.47 skrev Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]>: >> >>> According to how other projects are doing right now, looks like we are >>> not doing. >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/NOTICE-binary >>> https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/LICENSE-binary >>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/trunk/LICENSE >>> >>> If I understand correct, aether in storm-submit-tool is also EPL v1.0. >>> >>> Btw, I just ran the command "mvn generate-resources >>> -Dlicense.skipAggregateAddThirdParty=false" and see the output: the format >>> of output looks good though the output is a bit verbose. (Attached the >>> output file.) >>> >>> Would it be OK to include the file without cleaning up? >>> >>> 2019년 3월 25일 (월) 오후 8:19, Stig Rohde Døssing <[email protected]>님이 >>> 작성: >>> >>>> 0 >>>> >>>> Built and ran tests from source zip. >>>> Ran ExclamationTopology on local install set up from binary zip. >>>> Verified no unexpected error logs. >>>> Ran integration test locally. >>>> Clicked around in UI for a bit, checked that logviewer works. >>>> Ran the license check plugin, and verified that all dependency licenses >>>> are >>>> either category A or B. >>>> >>>> We have some category B dependencies, e.g. JAXB and Jersey under CDDL. >>>> https://apache.org/legal/resolved.html#appropriately-labelled-condition >>>> mentions that we should list category B dependencies somewhere visible to >>>> users. Do we do this currently? >>>> >>>> Den fre. 22. mar. 2019 kl. 21.23 skrev P. Taylor Goetz < >>>> [email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 2.0.0 (rc5) >>>>> >>>>> Full list of changes in this release: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.0.0-rc5/RELEASE_NOTES.html >>>>> >>>>> The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.0.0: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=tree;h=7e0a711e4ed5315f04f9f726caff61e0f169e320;hb=b5823809bd4b438e789a36f163f318d4b161ad13 >>>>> >>>>> The source archive being voted upon can be found here: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.0.0-rc5/apache-storm-2.0.0-src.tar.gz >>>>> >>>>> Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: >>>>> >>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.0.0-rc5/ >>>>> >>>>> The release artifacts are signed with the following key: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd >>>>> >>>>> The Nexus staging repository for this release is: >>>>> >>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1076 >>>>> >>>>> Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 2.0.0. >>>>> >>>>> When voting, please list the actions taken to verify the release. >>>>> >>>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. >>>>> >>>>> [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 2.0.0 >>>>> [ ] 0 No opinion >>>>> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... >>>>> >>>>> Thanks to everyone who contributed to this release. >>>>> >>>>> -Taylor >>>> >>>
