I noticed a couple of "issues" with the LICENSE/NOTICE/DISCLAIMER files: some
new, and some we overlooked for the first 0.1-incubating release as well.
A minor remark concerns the NOTICE and LICENSE files added for rave-commons
under src/main/resources/META-INF.
These are not needed as by default the remote-resources plugin already adds
these automatically as such.
And, if additional NOTICE and LICENSE attributions are needed we can use the
same solution as already used for rave-shindig and rave-portal, e.g. use the
src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/ folder to provided "snippets" only to
append to these files.
However, what is missing in the produced rave-commons jar artifact is the
DISCLAIMER file...
As the DISCLAIMER file is required for incubator produced artifacts, IMO this is
a blocker for the release :(
While I was checking out the other, automatically generated, artifacts in the
Maven repository, none of the -javadoc and -sources jars are "valid" from the
legal requirements concerning these files. For the rave-commons module the
DISCLAIMER file is missing from these files and for the rave-shindig and
rave-portal modules the -javadoc and -sources jars don't even contain required
LICENSE/NOTICE files...
To fix the latter, we'll probably have to modify the usage and/or configuration
of the maven javadoc and sources plugins for war type modules, and/or maybe even
disable them on war projects?
Other than the above, I verified the binary downloads and source distribution
and everything else checked out to be fine and good and would look like a fine
release to me. Good job again Matt!
While missing or or more LICENSE/NOTICE/DISCLAIMER files within those
automatically generated artifacts might be troublesome, I suspect there might be
plenty other projects "missing" out on this too, including TLP/non-incubator
projects. So, if only for this, this might still be acceptable (maybe with a
grunt) for an incubator release.
However the missing DISCLAIMER file from the rave-commons jar artifact IMO is
not acceptable and therefore I think I'll have to vote -1 :(
Ate
On 07/29/2011 10:10 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
Discussion thread for vote on 0.2-incubating release candidate.
For more information on the release process, checkout -
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html
Some of the things to check before voting are:
- can you run the demo binaries
- can you build the contents of source-release.zip and svn tag
- do all of the staged jars/zips contain the required LICENSE, NOTICE and
DISCLAIMER files
- are all of the staged jars signed and the signature verifiable
- is the signing key in the project's KEYS file and on a public server
