Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Hi all, @vongosling "I'm more concerned about the activities of our community than that. Our mailing list doesn't seem to see the voice of discussion." My concerns about the community discussions, and partly why I don't use this to communicate with Josh (besides what Josh has stated above), are the expectations that I don't know. Please, if there is a document that covers this, point me to it. - What is expected that we discuss here? What level of granularity? What details? There can be a lot of noise generated with constant emails that will completely obscure important discussions. - Are we expected to wait for others to give their input for all of our discussions? How long are we expected to wait for a response before going ahead? There can be decisions that need to be communicated promptly. Waiting for a comment could be pointless and not waiting might give the appearance of not caring about others input. I do understand that most may be volunteers and I mean no disrespect. However, I do feel that it is necessary to point out that our team members aren't volunteers - this is actually our job. So, while it might not be important to others to give, or have, a prompt response, for us it can be vital. I hope this conveys my questions and concerns. Thank you for your input in advance, John On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:33 PM Josh Innis wrote: > Hi Felix, > > John and I were friends before working together, so we are used to > discussing things privately; also we have a Google Hangouts forum we use > when we wanna talk to each other. When our project was donated to Apache we > decided to move all necessary communication to the Slack channel you are > included in. In retrospect, all we post there are patches that John and I > have already deemed necessary to the project. John and I have discussed > this and will endeavour to move our discussion to the Apache AGE mailing > lists. Thank you for understanding and sorry for the trouble. > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 5:13 PM Eya Badal wrote: > > > Please disregard the previous message. I just replaced it with "the > Apache > > Incubator PMC." > > > > On 2021/01/21 23:29:50, Eya Badal wrote: > > > Hello @ Felix Cheung and all, > > > > > > Regarding the WIP-Disclaimer, could you please advise what to include > > when it mentioned "the name of Apache TLP sponsor". I am not sure about > > this part. > > > > > > Thank you very much. > > > > > > "Apache AGE is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache Software > > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the name of Apache TLP sponsor. " > > > > > > > > > On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung > wrote: > > > > Thanks for the updates. > > > > > > > > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something > is > > off (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with > Apache > > license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just > > easier to get through the process. The community can decide if you want > to > > go this route or not. > > > > > > > > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be > > best not to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it > is > > best not to include files, source code etc from another project because > > then proper attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or > NOTICE > > file) > > > > > > > > See bundled dependencies here > > https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM > > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > > > Hi Felix, > > > > > > > > I just want to mention some points. > > > > > > > > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different > > names is fixed now. > > > > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source > > distribution. > > > > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and > > it is included. > > > > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: > > > > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we > > have to go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? > > > > > > > > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending > > tasks so I am not sure if we should
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Hi Felix, John and I were friends before working together, so we are used to discussing things privately; also we have a Google Hangouts forum we use when we wanna talk to each other. When our project was donated to Apache we decided to move all necessary communication to the Slack channel you are included in. In retrospect, all we post there are patches that John and I have already deemed necessary to the project. John and I have discussed this and will endeavour to move our discussion to the Apache AGE mailing lists. Thank you for understanding and sorry for the trouble. On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 5:13 PM Eya Badal wrote: > Please disregard the previous message. I just replaced it with "the Apache > Incubator PMC." > > On 2021/01/21 23:29:50, Eya Badal wrote: > > Hello @ Felix Cheung and all, > > > > Regarding the WIP-Disclaimer, could you please advise what to include > when it mentioned "the name of Apache TLP sponsor". I am not sure about > this part. > > > > Thank you very much. > > > > "Apache AGE is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache Software > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the name of Apache TLP sponsor. " > > > > > > On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung wrote: > > > Thanks for the updates. > > > > > > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is > off (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache > license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just > easier to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to > go this route or not. > > > > > > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be > best not to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is > best not to include files, source code etc from another project because > then proper attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE > file) > > > > > > See bundled dependencies here > https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > Hi Felix, > > > > > > I just want to mention some points. > > > > > > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different > names is fixed now. > > > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source > distribution. > > > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and > it is included. > > > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: > > > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we > have to go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? > > > > > > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending > tasks so I am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress > disclaimer. Please advise. > > > > > > We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung > wrote: > > > > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and > content. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > > > > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev > list and ask everyone to vote? > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung > wrote: > > > > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it > shouldn’t be just the mentor. > > > > > > > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > > > > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > > > > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > > > > >I will remove this file. > > > > > > > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > > > > > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > > > > > This is very strange. please check t
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Please disregard the previous message. I just replaced it with "the Apache Incubator PMC." On 2021/01/21 23:29:50, Eya Badal wrote: > Hello @ Felix Cheung and all, > > Regarding the WIP-Disclaimer, could you please advise what to include when it > mentioned "the name of Apache TLP sponsor". I am not sure about this part. > > Thank you very much. > > "Apache AGE is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache Software > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the name of Apache TLP sponsor. " > > > On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung wrote: > > Thanks for the updates. > > > > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is off > > (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache > > license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just > > easier to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to > > go this route or not. > > > > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best > > not to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best > > not to include files, source code etc from another project because then > > proper attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file) > > > > See bundled dependencies here https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html > > > > > > ____________ > > From: Eya Badal > > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > Hi Felix, > > > > I just want to mention some points. > > > > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names is > > fixed now. > > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source > > distribution. > > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it is > > included. > > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: > > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have to > > go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? > > > > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks so > > I am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. > > Please advise. > > > > We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. > > > > Best regards, > > > > On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung wrote: > > > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and content. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > > > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list > > > >and ask everyone to vote? > > > > > > > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung wrote: > > > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t > > > > be just the mentor. > > > > > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > > > >I will remove this file. > > > > > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > > > > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > > > > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > > > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > > > > > > > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure > > > >it is consistent. > > > > > > > > 3. > > > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > > > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers > > > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > > > > > > > 4. > > > > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > > > > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is > > > > there a possible licensing issue? > > > > > > > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache > > > >License as well which is included in the licensing file. > > > > 5, > > > > KEYS.txt > > > > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in > > > > git repo > > > > I will remove this as well. > > > > > > > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or > > > >thoughts. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > > > Dear Mentors, > > > > > > > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the > > > > following link: > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > > > > > > > Could you please review and approve. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Eya > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Hello @ Felix Cheung and all, Regarding the WIP-Disclaimer, could you please advise what to include when it mentioned "the name of Apache TLP sponsor". I am not sure about this part. Thank you very much. "Apache AGE is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache Software Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the name of Apache TLP sponsor. " On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung wrote: > Thanks for the updates. > > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is off > (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache > license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just easier > to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to go this > route or not. > > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best not > to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best not > to include files, source code etc from another project because then proper > attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file) > > See bundled dependencies here https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html > > > > From: Eya Badal > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM > To: dev@age.apache.org > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > Hi Felix, > > I just want to mention some points. > > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names is > fixed now. > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source > distribution. > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it is > included. > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have to go > by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? > > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks so I > am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. Please > advise. > > We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. > > Best regards, > > On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung wrote: > > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and content. > > > > > > ________ > > From: Eya Badal > > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list and > > >ask everyone to vote? > > > > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung wrote: > > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be > > > just the mentor. > > > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > > >I will remove this file. > > > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > > > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > > > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > > > > > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure > > >it is consistent. > > > > > > 3. > > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers > > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > > > > > 4. > > > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > > > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is there > > > a possible licensing issue? > > > > > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache > > >License as well which is included in the licensing file. > > > 5, > > > KEYS.txt > > > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git > > > repo > > > I will remove this as well. > > > > > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or > > >thoughts. > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > Dear Mentors, > > > > > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the > > > following link: > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > > > > > Could you please review and approve. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Eya > > > > > >
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Dear @ vongosling understood. Thank you very much for your guidance and feedback. It is our first release and we are learning the process of calling for a VOTE so thanks for the great tips. We will follow the formal format for a discussion and vote from now on. Regarding the "the voice of discussion" we would like to hear more since we might be confused just a bit. Could you please give us more guidance on the discussion and community activities for our mailing list? We will start the formal discussion soon before calling for a vote. Thank you. On 2021/01/20 01:10:33, vongosling wrote: > Hi, > > @Eya Badal Abdisho we must start a formal > discussion before the call for a vote. In addition, I'm more concerned > about the activities of our community than that. Our mailing list doesn't > seem to see the voice of discussion. If there's any confusion, please raise > it ：-0 > > There is some default output when we call for a discussion or vote for some > release, which includes not only the source(or bin) tarball location as > here. but also including git tag, keys location, and other necessary > references, such as release notes. The following is an example like this: > > The git tag to be voted upon: > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/tree/0.6.0-rc0 > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-ratis-thirdparty/tree/0.6.0-rc0> > > > The git commit hash: > > 2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2 > https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/commit/2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2 > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-ratis-thirdparty/commit/2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2> > > > THE SOURCE TARBALL CAN BE FOUND AT: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/0.6.0/rc0/ > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/thirdparty/0.6.0/rc0/> > > > The fingerprint of key to sign release artifacts: > 1CEF 33FA 6180 0117 BDB2 E0E0 D51E A8F0 0EE7 9B28 > > Release artifacts are signed with one of the keys available at: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/KEYS > <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/KEYS> > > Eya Badal 于2021年1月20日周三 上午12:18写道： > > > Thank you very much for your feedback and suggestions. I will change the > > disclaimer to WIP also we will not include the file regarding the > > OpneCypher. > > > > I will call for a VOTE after the changes soon. > > > > Best regards, > > Eya > > > > On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung wrote: > > > Thanks for the updates. > > > > > > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is > > off (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache > > license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just > > easier to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to > > go this route or not. > > > > > > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best > > not to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best > > not to include files, source code etc from another project because then > > proper attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file) > > > > > > See bundled dependencies here > > https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > Hi Felix, > > > > > > I just want to mention some points. > > > > > > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names > > is fixed now. > > > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source > > distribution. > > > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it > > is included. > > > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: > > > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have > > to go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? > > > > > > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks > > so I am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. > > Please advise. > > > > > > We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung wrote: > > > > Yes. See the link I included in
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Hi, @Eya Badal Abdisho we must start a formal discussion before the call for a vote. In addition, I'm more concerned about the activities of our community than that. Our mailing list doesn't seem to see the voice of discussion. If there's any confusion, please raise it ：-0 There is some default output when we call for a discussion or vote for some release, which includes not only the source(or bin) tarball location as here. but also including git tag, keys location, and other necessary references, such as release notes. The following is an example like this: The git tag to be voted upon: https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/tree/0.6.0-rc0 <https://github.com/apache/incubator-ratis-thirdparty/tree/0.6.0-rc0> The git commit hash: 2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2 https://github.com/apache/incubator-age/commit/2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2 <https://github.com/apache/incubator-ratis-thirdparty/commit/2c0214d6c12804773383ff14755e867788936da2> THE SOURCE TARBALL CAN BE FOUND AT: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/0.6.0/rc0/ <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/thirdparty/0.6.0/rc0/> The fingerprint of key to sign release artifacts: 1CEF 33FA 6180 0117 BDB2 E0E0 D51E A8F0 0EE7 9B28 Release artifacts are signed with one of the keys available at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/KEYS <https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/ratis/KEYS> Eya Badal 于2021年1月20日周三 上午12:18写道： > Thank you very much for your feedback and suggestions. I will change the > disclaimer to WIP also we will not include the file regarding the > OpneCypher. > > I will call for a VOTE after the changes soon. > > Best regards, > Eya > > On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung wrote: > > Thanks for the updates. > > > > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is > off (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache > license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just > easier to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to > go this route or not. > > > > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best > not to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best > not to include files, source code etc from another project because then > proper attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file) > > > > See bundled dependencies here > https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html > > > > > > ________________ > > From: Eya Badal > > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > Hi Felix, > > > > I just want to mention some points. > > > > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names > is fixed now. > > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source > distribution. > > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it > is included. > > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: > > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have > to go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? > > > > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks > so I am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. > Please advise. > > > > We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. > > > > Best regards, > > > > On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung wrote: > > > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and > content. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > > > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list > and ask everyone to vote? > > > > > > > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung > wrote: > > > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it > shouldn’t be just the mentor. > > > > > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > > > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > > > >I will remove this file. > > > > > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-in
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Thank you very much for your feedback and suggestions. I will change the disclaimer to WIP also we will not include the file regarding the OpneCypher. I will call for a VOTE after the changes soon. Best regards, Eya On 2021/01/19 05:58:03, Felix Cheung wrote: > Thanks for the updates. > > For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is off > (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache > license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just easier > to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to go this > route or not. > > For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best not > to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best not > to include files, source code etc from another project because then proper > attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file) > > See bundled dependencies here https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html > > > > From: Eya Badal > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM > To: dev@age.apache.org > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > Hi Felix, > > I just want to mention some points. > > 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names is > fixed now. > 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source > distribution. > 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it is > included. > 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: > We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have to go > by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? > > All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks so I > am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. Please > advise. > > We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. > > Best regards, > > On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung wrote: > > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and content. > > > > > > ____________________ > > From: Eya Badal > > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list and > > >ask everyone to vote? > > > > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung wrote: > > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be > > > just the mentor. > > > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > > >I will remove this file. > > > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > > > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > > > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > > > > > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure > > >it is consistent. > > > > > > 3. > > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers > > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > > > > > 4. > > > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > > > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is there > > > a possible licensing issue? > > > > > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache > > >License as well which is included in the licensing file. > > > 5, > > > KEYS.txt > > > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git > > > repo > > > I will remove this as well. > > > > > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or > > >thoughts. > > > > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > > > Dear Mentors, > > > > > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the > > > following link: > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > > > > > Could you please review and approve. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Eya > > > > > >
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Thanks for the updates. For disclaimer: it is your first release, so it is likely something is off (for example, you have a dependency that is not compatible with Apache license and normally will not be possible to release with) it is just easier to get through the process. The community can decide if you want to go this route or not. For OpenCypher - if it is a public spec from OpenCypher, it will be best not to include a file but link to it. Even if license compatible it is best not to include files, source code etc from another project because then proper attribution should be there (typically in the LICENSE or NOTICE file) See bundled dependencies here https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html From: Eya Badal Sent: Monday, January 18, 2021 7:32 AM To: dev@age.apache.org Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE Hi Felix, I just want to mention some points. 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names is fixed now. 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source distribution. 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it is included. 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have to go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks so I am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. Please advise. We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. Best regards, On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung wrote: > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and content. > > > > From: Eya Badal > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > To: dev@age.apache.org > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list and > >ask everyone to vote? > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung wrote: > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be > > just the mentor. > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > >I will remove this file. > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > > > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure it > >is consistent. > > > > 3. > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > > > 4. > > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is there a > > possible licensing issue? > > > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache License > >as well which is included in the licensing file. > > 5, > > KEYS.txt > > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git > > repo > > I will remove this as well. > > > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or > >thoughts. > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > Dear Mentors, > > > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the > > following link: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > > > Could you please review and approve. > > > > Best regards, > > Eya > > >
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Hi Felix, I just want to mention some points. 1-I did update the svn with new files. The unzipping to different names is fixed now. 2-I also removed the md5 file and KEYS file from the svn and source distribution. 3-As I mentioned before the OpenCypher is based on Apache License and it is included. 4-Regarding the DISCLAIMER-WIP: We do not have any tasks to do or tasks pending and not sure if we have to go by DISCLAIMER-WIP. What is your advice? All the licenses are there and I do not have anything for pending tasks so I am not sure if we should use Standard or Work in Progress disclaimer. Please advise. We will wait for your advice and then call for a VOTE. Best regards, On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung wrote: > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and content. > > > > From: Eya Badal > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > To: dev@age.apache.org > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list and > >ask everyone to vote? > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung wrote: > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be > > just the mentor. > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > >I will remove this file. > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > > > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure it > >is consistent. > > > > 3. > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > > > 4. > > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is there a > > possible licensing issue? > > > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache License > >as well which is included in the licensing file. > > 5, > > KEYS.txt > > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git > > repo > > I will remove this as well. > > > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or > >thoughts. > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > Dear Mentors, > > > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the > > following link: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > > > Could you please review and approve. > > > > Best regards, > > Eya > > >
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Thank you very much, will do. I do have some follow up questions: 1-Is there any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? 2-Regarding the OpenCypher licensing, it is based on Apache License and we believe it shouldn't be an issue to include it. Could you please advise? Thank you in advance for your time. On 2021/01/18 02:59:15, Felix Cheung wrote: > Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and content. > > > > From: Eya Badal > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM > To: dev@age.apache.org > Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. > >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list and > >ask everyone to vote? > > > On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung wrote: > > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be > > just the mentor. > > > > A good vote thread might be like: > > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > > > 1. md5 - should not include > >I will remove this file. > > > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > > > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure it > >is consistent. > > > > 3. > > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers > >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > > > 4. > > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is there a > > possible licensing issue? > > > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache License > >as well which is included in the licensing file. > > 5, > > KEYS.txt > > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git > > repo > > I will remove this as well. > > > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or > >thoughts. > > > > > > From: Eya Badal > > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > > To: dev@age.apache.org > > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > > > Dear Mentors, > > > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the > > following link: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > > > Could you please review and approve. > > > > Best regards, > > Eya > > >
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Yes. See the link I included in my reply for subject, format and content. From: Eya Badal Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2021 6:30:04 PM To: dev@age.apache.org Subject: Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list and ask >everyone to vote? On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung wrote: > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be > just the mentor. > > A good vote thread might be like: > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > 1. md5 - should not include >I will remove this file. > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure it is >consistent. > > 3. > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > 4. > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is there a > possible licensing issue? > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache License as >well which is included in the licensing file. > 5, > KEYS.txt > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git repo > I will remove this as well. > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or >thoughts. > ________ > > From: Eya Badal > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > To: dev@age.apache.org > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > Dear Mentors, > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the following > link: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > Could you please review and approve. > > Best regards, > Eya >
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Thank you very much, Flex. I appreciate the feedback. >Where should I post the thread vote? Should I post it in AGE Dev list and ask >everyone to vote? On 2021/01/15 02:20:01, Felix Cheung wrote: > Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be > just the mentor. > > A good vote thread might be like: > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html > > 1. md5 - should not include >I will remove this file. > > 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a > apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip > and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ > This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. > >I am not sure why this happened but I will take care of it and make sure it is >consistent. > > 3. > I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers >Any specific reason why not using Standard Disclaimer? > > 4. > openCypher/openCypher9.pdf > maybe don't include this in the source? where is the file from? is there a > possible licensing issue? > >It won't be any licensing issue since OpenCypher is based on Apache License as >well which is included in the licensing file. > 5, > KEYS.txt > don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git repo > I will remove this as well. > >Thank you again and please advise if you have any other suggestions or >thoughts. > ________ > > From: Eya Badal > Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM > To: dev@age.apache.org > Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE > > Dear Mentors, > > We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the following > link: > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ > > Could you please review and approve. > > Best regards, > Eya >
Re: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Did you have a vote thread? Anyone and everyone can vote, it shouldn’t be just the mentor. A good vote thread might be like: http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/VOTE-Release-Spark-3-1-0-RC1-td30524.html 1. md5 - should not include 2. apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.tar.gz unpack into a apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src.zip and that unpack into __MACOSX/apache-age-0.3.0-incubating-src/ This is very strange. please check the tar.gz file. 3. I'd suggest use DISCLAIMER-WIP https://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#choice_of_disclaimers 4. openCypher/openCypher9.pdf maybe don't include this in source? where is the file from? is there a possible licensing issue? 5, KEYS.txt don't include inside the source distribution - this should not be in git repo From: Eya Badal Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 12:00:26 PM To: dev@age.apache.org Subject: Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE Dear Mentors, We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the following link: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ Could you please review and approve. Best regards, Eya
Request for First AGE Apache Release Review - VOTE
Dear Mentors, We prepared the first Apache release and it is available now on the following link: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/age/ Could you please review and approve. Best regards, Eya
