Re: Rearrange the Project List into multiple pages?

2014-03-25 Thread David Crossley
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014, at 01:14 PM, sebb wrote:
 On 25 March 2014 01:46, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
  sebb:
 
  Not always, for example
 
  OpenOffice.org = ooo
 
  The usecase for the resourcename (perhaps resourceAlias) is to access SVN
 
  Repositories are linked from the podling status page, though it is 
  admittedly
  not as convenient to get there in two hops.
 
  Many recent podlings use Git -- often multiple repositories -- so linking to
  SVN is of limited use.
 
  If you really really want this I'm not going to object but I think it should
  be acknowledged that it's often inappropriate.
 
  David Crossley:
 
  Also for poor Clutch to try to keep up with the inconsistency of project
  names.
 
  Definitely the resource name is important for that purpose -- I'm simply
  questioning how much benefit we get from dedicating a field to it on the
  podling listing page.
 
  sebb once again:
 
As for breaking things up into three pages... it may not be necessary 
once
the rows shrink.
 
  The idea was not to lose all the existing data, most of which I think
  is only displayed on that page currently.
 
  Everything on that page is also duplicated on the podling status pages.
 
 I think that's not the case.
 
  If certain values are not in sync, I think we should acknowledge that and 
  fix
  our DRY problems rather than add more duplication.

 podlings.xml was introduced because the status pages don't include the
 data in a usable fashion for automated processing.
 It's also useful to have the basic information in a single file which
 can be subject to DTDs etc.
 The status files are free-form xml/xhtml

Also the podlings.xml was introduced because projects
do not keep their status pages up-to-date.

Being more concise it should be easier to manage,
and tools can verify it and utilise it.

 Maybe it would be possible to automate the inclusion of the relevant
 bits from podlings.xml into the individual status files.
 But that seems like a lot of work for not much reward.

The last time that we went through this, there was a suggestion to
trim the status page template to just provide links to the various bits
of summary information that are generated from podlings.xml file.

-David

  The idea was to provide a summary in addition to the individual more
  detailed sections.
 
  Hmm.  To be honest, I don't think that's justified.  I think it's too many
  resources providing slightly different views of the same information.
 
 The problem is that the current page has useful information but has
 become unwieldy.
 Rather than just split it 3, I think a summary would be useful.
 There's no full alphabetical listing of all podling names currently so
 this provides a useful additional resource.
 
  Another option would be to add JavaScript show/hide to the podling index 
  page,
  where clicking on a podling reveals expanded data.  I'm not in favor of that
  (too much work) but I mention it as another alternative to creating new web
  pages.
 
  Marvin Humphrey

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: Rearrange the Project List into multiple pages?

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 06:14, David Crossley cross...@apache.org wrote:
 On Tue, 25 Mar 2014, at 01:14 PM, sebb wrote:
 On 25 March 2014 01:46, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
  sebb:
 
  Not always, for example
 
  OpenOffice.org = ooo
 
  The usecase for the resourcename (perhaps resourceAlias) is to access SVN
 
  Repositories are linked from the podling status page, though it is 
  admittedly
  not as convenient to get there in two hops.
 
  Many recent podlings use Git -- often multiple repositories -- so linking 
  to
  SVN is of limited use.
 
  If you really really want this I'm not going to object but I think it 
  should
  be acknowledged that it's often inappropriate.
 
  David Crossley:
 
  Also for poor Clutch to try to keep up with the inconsistency of project
  names.
 
  Definitely the resource name is important for that purpose -- I'm simply
  questioning how much benefit we get from dedicating a field to it on the
  podling listing page.
 
  sebb once again:
 
As for breaking things up into three pages... it may not be 
necessary once
the rows shrink.
 
  The idea was not to lose all the existing data, most of which I think
  is only displayed on that page currently.
 
  Everything on that page is also duplicated on the podling status pages.

 I think that's not the case.

  If certain values are not in sync, I think we should acknowledge that and 
  fix
  our DRY problems rather than add more duplication.

 podlings.xml was introduced because the status pages don't include the
 data in a usable fashion for automated processing.
 It's also useful to have the basic information in a single file which
 can be subject to DTDs etc.
 The status files are free-form xml/xhtml

 Also the podlings.xml was introduced because projects
 do not keep their status pages up-to-date.

 Being more concise it should be easier to manage,
 and tools can verify it and utilise it.

 Maybe it would be possible to automate the inclusion of the relevant
 bits from podlings.xml into the individual status files.
 But that seems like a lot of work for not much reward.

 The last time that we went through this, there was a suggestion to
 trim the status page template to just provide links to the various bits
 of summary information that are generated from podlings.xml file.

However, there is lots of information in the status files that is not
in podlings.xml, and some that is in podlings but not status.

The overlap is currently very small compared with the total amount of
information in both formats.

The fields present in both are:
* name
* status (not always reflected in status page and very difficult to
extract in any case)
* description (not always the same)
* mentors
* start date (not easy to extract from status page)
* end date (not easy to extract and is often not present)

Podlings.xml only
* sponsor
* reporting details
* resolution of graduated podlings
* champion (might be in some status pages)
* resource/resourceAliases

Status page only
* news
* committer list
* websites (may be more than one)
* mailing lists (not necessarily derivable from data in podlings.xml)
* bug tracker
* link to source code (may be git, even svn URL not always obvious
from podlings.xml, but perhaps could fix that)
* links to incubation status reports
* incubation work items

For podlings that do make full use of their status file, it seems
wrong to restrict the format unnecessarily.
Which is why (if anything is to be done) I would favour having a way
to import the podlings.xml data so the status file can easily make use
of it.

There may be one or two fields that could move into podlings.xml, but
if it becomes too large it will become very difficult to edit.
Imagine concatenating all the status files and editting that.

 -David

  The idea was to provide a summary in addition to the individual more
  detailed sections.
 
  Hmm.  To be honest, I don't think that's justified.  I think it's too many
  resources providing slightly different views of the same information.

 The problem is that the current page has useful information but has
 become unwieldy.
 Rather than just split it 3, I think a summary would be useful.
 There's no full alphabetical listing of all podling names currently so
 this provides a useful additional resource.

  Another option would be to add JavaScript show/hide to the podling index 
  page,
  where clicking on a podling reveals expanded data.  I'm not in favor of 
  that
  (too much work) but I mention it as another alternative to creating new web
  pages.
 
  Marvin Humphrey

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



[VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
Hi everyone,
This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is accessed
as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using SQL. This
is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.94 branch of
Apache HBase and will be our second release in the incubator. The release
includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary release.

New features include:
- Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
- Shared tables over same physical HBase table
- Read-only and updatable views
- Multi-tenancy
- JDBC ARRAY type
- Sequence creation and usage

The dev list thread for the passing vote (10 +1s with 3 IPMC votes) can be
found at:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1Jdg4x1Fo6xtX%3DEzWiGrQsxLkgGUJTAm7Dcb-M8NTR9MJgw%40mail.gmail.com%3E

The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

The binary artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/

Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc

KEYS file available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS

The tag to be voted upon:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1

For information about the contents of this release see:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1

Release notes
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin

Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:

[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

Thanks,
James


[VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
Hi everyone,
This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is accessed
as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using SQL. This
is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.98 branch of
Apache HBase (0.98.1+) and will be our third release in the incubator. The
release includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary
release.

The 4.0.0 release has feature parity with our pending 3.0.0 release. New
features include:
- Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
- Shared tables over same physical HBase table
- Read-only and updatable views
- Multi-tenancy
- JDBC ARRAY type
- Sequence creation and usage

The dev list thread for the passing vote (9 +1s with 2 IPMC votes) can be
found at:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1JdiQaaWRzgwXF9d7XR%2B3jrv4OtSEFiQX%3DZfszfqz6L9REg%40mail.gmail.com%3E

The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

The binary artifacts can be found at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/

Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc

KEYS file available here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS

The tag to be voted upon:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1

For information about the contents of this release see:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1

Release notes
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin

Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:

[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

Thanks,
James


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread Devaraj Das
+1. Downloaded the source, built the package and ran unit tests.

On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:39 AM, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 Hi everyone,
 This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
 is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is accessed
 as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using SQL. 
 This
 is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.94 branch of
 Apache HBase and will be our second release in the incubator. The release
 includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary release.

 New features include:
 - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
 - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
 - Read-only and updatable views
 - Multi-tenancy
 - JDBC ARRAY type
 - Sequence creation and usage

 The dev list thread for the passing vote (10 +1s with 3 IPMC votes) can be
 found at:
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1Jdg4x1Fo6xtX%3DEzWiGrQsxLkgGUJTAm7Dcb-M8NTR9MJgw%40mail.gmail.com%3E

 The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

 The binary artifacts can be found at:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/

 Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
 https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc

 KEYS file available here:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS

 The tag to be voted upon:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1

 For information about the contents of this release see:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1

 Release notes
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin

 Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:

 [ ] +1 approve
 [ ] +0 no opinion
 [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

 Thanks,
 James

-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread John D. Ament
Can you update your notice file? [1]

- John

[1]:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=blob;f=NOTICE;h=08364793ad096649eb24b3d582b2307376b25863;hb=HEAD


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Devaraj Das d...@hortonworks.com wrote:

 +1. Downloaded the source, built the package and ran unit tests.

 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:39 AM, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org
 wrote:
  Hi everyone,
  This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
  is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is
 accessed
  as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using
 SQL. This
  is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.94 branch of
  Apache HBase and will be our second release in the incubator. The release
  includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary release.
 
  New features include:
  - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
  - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
  - Read-only and updatable views
  - Multi-tenancy
  - JDBC ARRAY type
  - Sequence creation and usage
 
  The dev list thread for the passing vote (10 +1s with 3 IPMC votes) can
 be
  found at:
 
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1Jdg4x1Fo6xtX%3DEzWiGrQsxLkgGUJTAm7Dcb-M8NTR9MJgw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
 
  The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
 
  The binary artifacts can be found at:
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/
 
  Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
  https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc
 
  KEYS file available here:
  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS
 
  The tag to be voted upon:
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1
 
  For information about the contents of this release see:
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1
 
  Release notes
 
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin
 
  Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:
 
  [ ] +1 approve
  [ ] +0 no opinion
  [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
 
  Thanks,
  James

 --
 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
 NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
 which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
 privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
 of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
 any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
 forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
 received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
 and delete it from your system. Thank You.

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org




Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 18:11, John D. Ament john.d.am...@gmail.com wrote:
 Can you update your notice file? [1]

Please don't; that does not look like a correct NOTICE file.

See

http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#simple (et seq.)


 - John

 [1]:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=blob;f=NOTICE;h=08364793ad096649eb24b3d582b2307376b25863;hb=HEAD


 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Devaraj Das d...@hortonworks.com wrote:

 +1. Downloaded the source, built the package and ran unit tests.

 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:39 AM, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org
 wrote:
  Hi everyone,
  This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
  is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is
 accessed
  as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using
 SQL. This
  is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.94 branch of
  Apache HBase and will be our second release in the incubator. The release
  includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary release.
 
  New features include:
  - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
  - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
  - Read-only and updatable views
  - Multi-tenancy
  - JDBC ARRAY type
  - Sequence creation and usage
 
  The dev list thread for the passing vote (10 +1s with 3 IPMC votes) can
 be
  found at:
 
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1Jdg4x1Fo6xtX%3DEzWiGrQsxLkgGUJTAm7Dcb-M8NTR9MJgw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
 
  The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
 
  The binary artifacts can be found at:
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/
 
  Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
  https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc
 
  KEYS file available here:
  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS
 
  The tag to be voted upon:
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1
 
  For information about the contents of this release see:
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1
 
  Release notes
 
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin
 
  Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:
 
  [ ] +1 approve
  [ ] +0 no opinion
  [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
 
  Thanks,
  James

 --
 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
 NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
 which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
 privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
 of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
 any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
 forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
 received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
 and delete it from your system. Thank You.

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 16:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 Hi everyone,
 This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
 is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is accessed
 as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using SQL. 
 This
 is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.94 branch of
 Apache HBase and will be our second release in the incubator. The release
 includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary release.

 New features include:
 - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
 - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
 - Read-only and updatable views
 - Multi-tenancy
 - JDBC ARRAY type
 - Sequence creation and usage

 The dev list thread for the passing vote (10 +1s with 3 IPMC votes) can be
 found at:
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1Jdg4x1Fo6xtX%3DEzWiGrQsxLkgGUJTAm7Dcb-M8NTR9MJgw%40mail.gmail.com%3E

 The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

The source bundle includes directories and files not in Git.

There should be no target directories in the source bundle, and no
Rat.txt files.

 The binary artifacts can be found at:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/

The binary NOTICE file appears to include unnecessary items.

Please see:

http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#simple (et seq.)

Does the binary bundle actually include the bits from
SQLline/SLF4J/ANTLR/JUnit ?

If not, they must NOT be in the NOTICE file.
If so, then the license files must be included in - or locally linked
from - the LICENSE file
It _may_ be necessary to mention some of them in the NOTICE file -
this depends on the exact license conditions.

 Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
 https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc

 KEYS file available here:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS

The canonical location should be shown as

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/incubator/phoenix/KEYS

since that is where the download page should link the KEYS file from.

[Not a blocker for the release contents per se, but please fix before
announcing the release]

 The tag to be voted upon:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1

I could not work out how to download a tarball/zip of this specific
tag used to create the source release.
I tried starting at the git url above.
I then clicked on the object hash, and clicked on snapshot on the
resulting page.

However the resulting download had some differences from the source
bundle, so either the tag or the source bundle has been modified.

Also, are Git tags immutable, or can they be deleted/replaced?
If not immutable, please provide an immutable attribute such as the tag hash.

It's important to be able to tie the source code to the source code
control system (SCCS), since the SCCS contents are what has been
validated by the PPMC.

 For information about the contents of this release see:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1

 Release notes
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin

 Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:

 [ ] +1 approve
 [ ] +0 no opinion
 [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

 Thanks,
 James

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread John D. Ament
What do you mean? That was Phoenix's file I was linking to.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:31 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 18:11, John D. Ament john.d.am...@gmail.com wrote:
  Can you update your notice file? [1]

 Please don't; that does not look like a correct NOTICE file.

 See

 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#simple (et seq.)


  - John
 
  [1]:
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=blob;f=NOTICE;h=08364793ad096649eb24b3d582b2307376b25863;hb=HEAD
 
 
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Devaraj Das d...@hortonworks.com
 wrote:
 
  +1. Downloaded the source, built the package and ran unit tests.
 
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:39 AM, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org
  wrote:
   Hi everyone,
   This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1.
 Phoenix
   is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is
  accessed
   as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using
  SQL. This
   is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.94 branch
 of
   Apache HBase and will be our second release in the incubator. The
 release
   includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary release.
  
   New features include:
   - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
   - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
   - Read-only and updatable views
   - Multi-tenancy
   - JDBC ARRAY type
   - Sequence creation and usage
  
   The dev list thread for the passing vote (10 +1s with 3 IPMC votes)
 can
  be
   found at:
  
 
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1Jdg4x1Fo6xtX%3DEzWiGrQsxLkgGUJTAm7Dcb-M8NTR9MJgw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
  
   The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found
 at:
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
  
   The binary artifacts can be found at:
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/
  
   Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
   https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc
  
   KEYS file available here:
   https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS
  
   The tag to be voted upon:
  
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1
  
   For information about the contents of this release see:
  
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v3.0.0-incubating-rc1
  
   Release notes
  
 
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin
  
   Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:
  
   [ ] +1 approve
   [ ] +0 no opinion
   [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
  
   Thanks,
   James
 
  --
  CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
  NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
 entity to
  which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
  privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
 reader
  of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
 that
  any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
  forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
  received this communication in error, please contact the sender
 immediately
  and delete it from your system. Thank You.
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
 
 

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org




CMS improvements of late...

2014-03-25 Thread Joe Schaefer
See http://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/scaling_down_the_cms_to
for today's discussion of the Thrift migration to the CMS.
Basically there was a support gap for moderately-sized sites
that has now been filled with the latest changes to the cms
build libs.

HTH


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 18:56, John D. Ament john.d.am...@gmail.com wrote:
 What do you mean? That was Phoenix's file I was linking to.

I realise that the file is in the Phoenix Git and is called NOTICE.
However it is not a valid NOTICE file according to:

[0] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#simple (et seq.)

The header is wrong.
The second paragraph should be developed at not developed by.

etc - please read the page mentioned above [0]

The file at [1] does not appear to be the same as the NOTICE file in the tag [2]

which contains the following contents that looks fine (assuming there
are no 3rd party source files that need attribution in the NOTICE
file)


Apache Phoenix (Incubating)
Copyright 2014 The Apache Software Foundation

This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).


The source archive that is the subject of this vote has the same contents.
As such, replacing its NOTICE with [1] would be a mistake.

The proposed NOTICE does not look correct for the binary bundle
either, as explained elsethread (and in [0])

[2] 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=commit;h=025a07c64d8f4a68d1c13b3022fe7375bbacfbb4


 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:31 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 18:11, John D. Ament john.d.am...@gmail.com wrote:
  Can you update your notice file? [1]

 Please don't; that does not look like a correct NOTICE file.

 See

 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#simple (et seq.)


  - John
 
  [1]:
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=blob;f=NOTICE;h=08364793ad096649eb24b3d582b2307376b25863;hb=HEAD

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread Andrew Purtell
+1 (binding) carrying my vote on dev@phoenix.incubator over to general@,
caveat the HBase 0.98.1 release happens as expected before this vote
closes. Otherwise we should cancel this vote.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:46 AM, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.orgwrote:

 Hi everyone,
 This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
 is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is accessed
 as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using SQL.
 This
 is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.98 branch of
 Apache HBase (0.98.1+) and will be our third release in the incubator. The
 release includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary
 release.

 The 4.0.0 release has feature parity with our pending 3.0.0 release. New
 features include:
 - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
 - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
 - Read-only and updatable views
 - Multi-tenancy
 - JDBC ARRAY type
 - Sequence creation and usage

 The dev list thread for the passing vote (9 +1s with 2 IPMC votes) can be
 found at:

 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1JdiQaaWRzgwXF9d7XR%2B3jrv4OtSEFiQX%3DZfszfqz6L9REg%40mail.gmail.com%3E

 The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:

 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

 The binary artifacts can be found at:

 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/

 Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
 https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc

 KEYS file available here:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS

 The tag to be voted upon:

 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1

 For information about the contents of this release see:

 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1

 Release notes

 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin

 Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:

 [ ] +1 approve
 [ ] +0 no opinion
 [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

 Thanks,
 James




-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread Andrew Purtell
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:54 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 16:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 [...]

  The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

 The source bundle includes directories and files not in Git.

 There should be no target directories in the source bundle, and no
 Rat.txt files.


Where are those?

$ wget
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
$ tar xzf phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
$ cd phoenix-3.0.0-incubating
$ find . -name target
(no results)
$ find . -name '*.txt'
./bin/readme.txt
$ cd ..
$ wget
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
$ cat phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
[...]
fee73e23cf055fd5a5836f40be87cf9975927509583fb3f067bcead2815dd3b8
*phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
$ sha256sum phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
fee73e23cf055fd5a5836f40be87cf9975927509583fb3f067bcead2815dd3b8
 phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz


-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 21:56, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:54 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 16:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 [...]

  The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

 The source bundle includes directories and files not in Git.

 There should be no target directories in the source bundle, and no
 Rat.txt files.


 Where are those?

In the source bundle.

 $ wget
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz

That's the binary bundle.

 $ tar xzf phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
 $ cd phoenix-3.0.0-incubating
 $ find . -name target
 (no results)
 $ find . -name '*.txt'
 ./bin/readme.txt
 $ cd ..
 $ wget
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
 $ cat phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
 [...]
 fee73e23cf055fd5a5836f40be87cf9975927509583fb3f067bcead2815dd3b8
 *phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
 $ sha256sum phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
 fee73e23cf055fd5a5836f40be87cf9975927509583fb3f067bcead2815dd3b8
  phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz


 --
 Best regards,

- Andy

 Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
 (via Tom White)

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread Andrew Purtell
Pardon, got -bin and -src crossed mentally, indeed they are there.

Looks like src was packaged after running the RAT check.  Does this require
a new RC?


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:59 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 21:56, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:54 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On 25 March 2014 16:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  [...]
 
   The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found
 at:
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
 
  The source bundle includes directories and files not in Git.
 
  There should be no target directories in the source bundle, and no
  Rat.txt files.
 
 
  Where are those?

 In the source bundle.

  $ wget
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz

 That's the binary bundle.

  $ tar xzf phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
  $ cd phoenix-3.0.0-incubating
  $ find . -name target
  (no results)
  $ find . -name '*.txt'
  ./bin/readme.txt
  $ cd ..
  $ wget
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
  $ cat phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
  [...]
  fee73e23cf055fd5a5836f40be87cf9975927509583fb3f067bcead2815dd3b8
  *phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
  $ sha256sum phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
  fee73e23cf055fd5a5836f40be87cf9975927509583fb3f067bcead2815dd3b8
   phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
 
 
  --
  Best regards,
 
 - Andy
 
  Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
  (via Tom White)

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org




-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread Henry Saputra
Just clarifying that Phoenix is trying to do two releases (3.0.0 and
4.0.0) at the same time?
Or maybe my gmail thread history is messed up.

- Henry

On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:46 AM, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 Hi everyone,
 This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
 is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is accessed
 as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using SQL. 
 This
 is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.98 branch of
 Apache HBase (0.98.1+) and will be our third release in the incubator. The
 release includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary
 release.

 The 4.0.0 release has feature parity with our pending 3.0.0 release. New
 features include:
 - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
 - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
 - Read-only and updatable views
 - Multi-tenancy
 - JDBC ARRAY type
 - Sequence creation and usage

 The dev list thread for the passing vote (9 +1s with 2 IPMC votes) can be
 found at:
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1JdiQaaWRzgwXF9d7XR%2B3jrv4OtSEFiQX%3DZfszfqz6L9REg%40mail.gmail.com%3E

 The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

 The binary artifacts can be found at:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/

 Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
 https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc

 KEYS file available here:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS

 The tag to be voted upon:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1

 For information about the contents of this release see:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1

 Release notes
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin

 Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:

 [ ] +1 approve
 [ ] +0 no opinion
 [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

 Thanks,
 James

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 22:01, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
 Pardon, got -bin and -src crossed mentally, indeed they are there.

 Looks like src was packaged after running the RAT check.  Does this require
 a new RC?

If I were the RM I would respin the RC for this sort of packaging error.

But in this case there are other more serious errors, the binary NOTICE file.

And most important, please establish why the Git tag does not agree
with the source archive, otherwise the new RC may also be faulty in
that regard.

It's vital that all files in the source bundle can be traced back to
the source code control system.

 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:59 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 21:56, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:54 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On 25 March 2014 16:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  [...]
 
   The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found
 at:
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
 
  The source bundle includes directories and files not in Git.
 
  There should be no target directories in the source bundle, and no
  Rat.txt files.
 
 
  Where are those?

 In the source bundle.

  $ wget
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz

 That's the binary bundle.

  $ tar xzf phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
  $ cd phoenix-3.0.0-incubating
  $ find . -name target
  (no results)
  $ find . -name '*.txt'
  ./bin/readme.txt
  $ cd ..
  $ wget
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
  $ cat phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz.sha
  [...]
  fee73e23cf055fd5a5836f40be87cf9975927509583fb3f067bcead2815dd3b8
  *phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
  $ sha256sum phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
  fee73e23cf055fd5a5836f40be87cf9975927509583fb3f067bcead2815dd3b8
   phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
 
 
  --
  Best regards,
 
 - Andy
 
  Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
  (via Tom White)

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org




 --
 Best regards,

- Andy

 Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
 (via Tom White)

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
The 4.0.0 release has the same problems as the 3.0.0 release.

Spurious files in source bundle
Incorrect NOTICE file in binary bundle
Source bundle does not agree with Git tag even after allowing for the
spurious RAT files - some other files have differences from the tag.
There are also some files missing from the source bundle (apart from
.gitignore, which is OK to omit)


On 25 March 2014 16:46, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 Hi everyone,
 This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
 is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is accessed
 as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using SQL. 
 This
 is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.98 branch of
 Apache HBase (0.98.1+) and will be our third release in the incubator. The
 release includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary
 release.

 The 4.0.0 release has feature parity with our pending 3.0.0 release. New
 features include:
 - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
 - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
 - Read-only and updatable views
 - Multi-tenancy
 - JDBC ARRAY type
 - Sequence creation and usage

 The dev list thread for the passing vote (9 +1s with 2 IPMC votes) can be
 found at:
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1JdiQaaWRzgwXF9d7XR%2B3jrv4OtSEFiQX%3DZfszfqz6L9REg%40mail.gmail.com%3E

 The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/

 The binary artifacts can be found at:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/

 Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
 https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc

 KEYS file available here:
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS

 The tag to be voted upon:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1

 For information about the contents of this release see:
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1

 Release notes
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin

 Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:

 [ ] +1 approve
 [ ] +0 no opinion
 [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)

 Thanks,
 James

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread Andrew Purtell
James, Mujtaba, et. al.,

Can we add a Releasing page to http://phoenix.incubator.apache.org/ that
includes step by step instructions for packaging a Phoenix release. We can
fine tune this process according to feedback received during RCs. This
could/should include shell commands captured one time through your process
for generating a source tarball from a Git checkout at an exact SHA, saving
off a clean source tarball before running release checks, generating binary
release tarballs, calculating checksums over the tarballs, signing the
tarballs, etc.


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 22:01, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
  Pardon, got -bin and -src crossed mentally, indeed they are there.
 
  Looks like src was packaged after running the RAT check.  Does this
 require
  a new RC?

 If I were the RM I would respin the RC for this sort of packaging error.

 But in this case there are other more serious errors, the binary NOTICE
 file.

 And most important, please establish why the Git tag does not agree
 with the source archive, otherwise the new RC may also be faulty in
 that regard.

 It's vital that all files in the source bundle can be traced back to
 the source code control system.

  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:59 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On 25 March 2014 21:56, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
   On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:54 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
  
   On 25 March 2014 16:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
   [...]
  
The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found
  at:
   
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
  
   The source bundle includes directories and files not in Git.
  
   There should be no target directories in the source bundle, and no
   Rat.txt files.
  
  
   Where are those?
 
  In the source bundle.
 
   $ wget
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
 
  That's the binary bundle.


-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
Thanks for the detailed review, Sebb. We really appreciate you spending
your time going through this. Here's the list of TODOs for us:
1) In the binary bundle:
a) Fix the copy/paste error for the URL to SQLLine in the NOTICE file
in the binary bundle as noted by Gabriel here[1].
   b) Change developed by to developed at in the NOTICE file
   c) In answer to your question, yes all those projects listed are bundled
with our binary distribution.
2) In the source bundle:
a) The target dir and rat.txt files should be removed from the src
bundle
b) There were the following changes made to the src bundle not
reflected in git:
  - the docs/phoenix.csv file was removed (it's part of our website so
should not be included in our git repo)
  - the build.txt file was modified slightly in the src bundle.
  - the CHANGES file is bundled with the src bundle, but not checked
into git.
 - the README.md file is not included in the src bundle, but instead a
README file is included instead.

For the source binary changes, we could commit and push those changes to
git and update our 3.0.0 tag. Would that be an acceptable solution?

Are there more changes necessary to the NOTICE file in the binary bundle?
Would it be acceptable to fix the URL in the next release? If not, would we
need to go through a dev vote again for the NOTICE file change?

FWIW, we'll automate the generation of our release bundles for our next
release (and make sure the source matches exactly as well).

Thanks,
James

[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAA5C_puNoy74jniWMTbx%3DZFyc1itf0w6E4kCHvCOTK_OTfBgmg%40mail.gmail.com%3E


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:

 James, Mujtaba, et. al.,

 Can we add a Releasing page to http://phoenix.incubator.apache.org/ that
 includes step by step instructions for packaging a Phoenix release. We can
 fine tune this process according to feedback received during RCs. This
 could/should include shell commands captured one time through your process
 for generating a source tarball from a Git checkout at an exact SHA, saving
 off a clean source tarball before running release checks, generating binary
 release tarballs, calculating checksums over the tarballs, signing the
 tarballs, etc.


 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

  On 25 March 2014 22:01, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
   Pardon, got -bin and -src crossed mentally, indeed they are there.
  
   Looks like src was packaged after running the RAT check.  Does this
  require
   a new RC?
 
  If I were the RM I would respin the RC for this sort of packaging error.
 
  But in this case there are other more serious errors, the binary NOTICE
  file.
 
  And most important, please establish why the Git tag does not agree
  with the source archive, otherwise the new RC may also be faulty in
  that regard.
 
  It's vital that all files in the source bundle can be traced back to
  the source code control system.
 
   On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:59 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
  
   On 25 March 2014 21:56, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:54 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
   
On 25 March 2014 16:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org
 wrote:
[...]
   
 The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be
 found
   at:

   
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
   
The source bundle includes directories and files not in Git.
   
There should be no target directories in the source bundle, and
 no
Rat.txt files.
   
   
Where are those?
  
   In the source bundle.
  
$ wget
   
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating.tar.gz
  
   That's the binary bundle.
 

 --
 Best regards,

- Andy

 Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
 (via Tom White)



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
Yes, Henry - that's correct - two releases. The releases are functionally
equivalent, but support two different major versions of HBase.
Thanks,
James


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Henry Saputra henry.sapu...@gmail.comwrote:

 Just clarifying that Phoenix is trying to do two releases (3.0.0 and
 4.0.0) at the same time?
 Or maybe my gmail thread history is messed up.

 - Henry

 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:46 AM, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org
 wrote:
  Hi everyone,
  This is a call for a vote on Apache Phoenix 4.0.0 incubating RC1. Phoenix
  is a SQL query engine for Apache HBase, a NoSQL data store. It is
 accessed
  as a JDBC driver and enables querying and managing HBase tables using
 SQL. This
  is the next major release of Phoenix compatible with the 0.98 branch of
  Apache HBase (0.98.1+) and will be our third release in the incubator.
 The
  release includes both a source-only release and a convenience binary
  release.
 
  The 4.0.0 release has feature parity with our pending 3.0.0 release. New
  features include:
  - Equi-joins through broadcast hash join
  - Shared tables over same physical HBase table
  - Read-only and updatable views
  - Multi-tenancy
  - JDBC ARRAY type
  - Sequence creation and usage
 
  The dev list thread for the passing vote (9 +1s with 2 IPMC votes) can be
  found at:
 
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAAF1JdiQaaWRzgwXF9d7XR%2B3jrv4OtSEFiQX%3DZfszfqz6L9REg%40mail.gmail.com%3E
 
  The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be found at:
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
 
  The binary artifacts can be found at:
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-4.0.0-incubating-rc1/bin/
 
  Release artifacts are signed with the following key:
  https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/mujtaba.asc
 
  KEYS file available here:
  https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/KEYS
 
  The tag to be voted upon:
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1
 
  For information about the contents of this release see:
 
 https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-phoenix.git;a=log;h=refs/tags/v4.0.0-incubating-rc1
 
  Release notes
 
 https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12326145styleName=TextprojectId=12315120Create=Createatl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED%7C34a706e780c7e8f198c9ca903e80572b560599b6%7Clin
 
  Vote will be open for at least 72 hours. Please vote:
 
  [ ] +1 approve
  [ ] +0 no opinion
  [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
 
  Thanks,
  James

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org




Flex IP Clearance

2014-03-25 Thread Alex Harui
Despite having the best mentors one could hope for, it appears the Apache
Flex PMC missed one thing, which is that all SGAs needed to go through the
IP Clearance process.  We did review the IP before it went into the repos,
but we did not fill out forms and get approval from Incubator.

Adobe has made several donations.  All but one is already in a repo.  And
Digital Primates made another which is also in a repo.  It appears that
the Digital Primates donation may have some file header and copyright
issues that need to be sorted out, which prompted a question on
legal-discuss and the discovery that we had not followed the clearance
process completely.

Should we now retroactively submit the IP Clearance forms?  Or are there
other steps we need to take first?

Thanks,
-Alex


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 22:27, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 Thanks for the detailed review, Sebb. We really appreciate you spending
 your time going through this. Here's the list of TODOs for us:
 1) In the binary bundle:
 a) Fix the copy/paste error for the URL to SQLLine in the NOTICE file
 in the binary bundle as noted by Gabriel here[1].

It's not clear to me that the SQLLine attribution should even be in
the NOTICE file.
Though of course if it must be included, the URL should be correct.

b) Change developed by to developed at in the NOTICE file
c) In answer to your question, yes all those projects listed are bundled
 with our binary distribution.

Are you sure?
Even JUnit and ANTLR?

Even if they are included, that only means that a LICENSE file entry
is needed, not necessarily a NOTICE entry.

 2) In the source bundle:
 a) The target dir and rat.txt files should be removed from the src
 bundle

Yes.

 b) There were the following changes made to the src bundle not
 reflected in git:
   - the docs/phoenix.csv file was removed (it's part of our website so
 should not be included in our git repo)

OK

   - the build.txt file was modified slightly in the src bundle.

Not OK.

   - the CHANGES file is bundled with the src bundle, but not checked
 into git.

The source bundle must only contain files contained in the Git tag.

The point is that the only practical way to ensure that the source
bundle contains only files that have the appropriate license and are
allowed to be included in a release is to compare the files with Git
(or SVN). Otherwise it's impossible to establish provenance and
difficult to determine if the file has a suitable license.

  - the README.md file is not included in the src bundle, but instead a
 README file is included instead.

The ASF releases source, so source files to create documentation
should be included.

 For the source binary changes, we could commit and push those changes to
 git and update our 3.0.0 tag. Would that be an acceptable solution?

Not sure what you are proposing.

The RC reviewers need to be able to check that the source bundle
agrees with the tag.
Also that the NOTICE and LICENSE files in the bundles agree with the
contents of those bundles and that any bundled code can be released
under the Apache License.

 Are there more changes necessary to the NOTICE file in the binary bundle?
 Would it be acceptable to fix the URL in the next release? If not, would we
 need to go through a dev vote again for the NOTICE file change?

See above.

 FWIW, we'll automate the generation of our release bundles for our next
 release (and make sure the source matches exactly as well).

 Thanks,
 James

 [1]
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAA5C_puNoy74jniWMTbx%3DZFyc1itf0w6E4kCHvCOTK_OTfBgmg%40mail.gmail.com%3E


 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:

 James, Mujtaba, et. al.,

 Can we add a Releasing page to http://phoenix.incubator.apache.org/ that
 includes step by step instructions for packaging a Phoenix release. We can
 fine tune this process according to feedback received during RCs. This
 could/should include shell commands captured one time through your process
 for generating a source tarball from a Git checkout at an exact SHA, saving
 off a clean source tarball before running release checks, generating binary
 release tarballs, calculating checksums over the tarballs, signing the
 tarballs, etc.


 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

  On 25 March 2014 22:01, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
   Pardon, got -bin and -src crossed mentally, indeed they are there.
  
   Looks like src was packaged after running the RAT check.  Does this
  require
   a new RC?
 
  If I were the RM I would respin the RC for this sort of packaging error.
 
  But in this case there are other more serious errors, the binary NOTICE
  file.
 
  And most important, please establish why the Git tag does not agree
  with the source archive, otherwise the new RC may also be faulty in
  that regard.
 
  It's vital that all files in the source bundle can be traced back to
  the source code control system.
 
   On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 2:59 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
  
   On 25 March 2014 21:56, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:54 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
   
On 25 March 2014 16:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org
 wrote:
[...]
   
 The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc can be
 found
   at:

   
  
 
 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/phoenix/phoenix-3.0.0-incubating-rc1/src/
   
The source bundle includes directories and files not in Git.
   
There should be no target directories in the source bundle, and
 no
Rat.txt files.
   
   
Where are those?
  
   In the source bundle.
  
$ wget
   
  
 
 

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
Our binary distribution bundles sqlline which has a BSD Clause 3 license.
We've included this license with the Apache 2 license in our LICENSE file.
Do we need to include sqlline in the NOTICE file?

Yes, we bundle ANTLR in our binary distribution. Most of the other items
are pulled in based on the transitive dependencies of other jars we've
bundled in our binary distribution. That's why we included them in the
NOTICE file. Is this correct?

Our LICENSE file includes the licenses of all bundled software - either
Apache 2 or BSD Clause 3.

Please advise, as we're trying to follow the guidelines listed here[1].

Thanks,
James

[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html



On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 22:27, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  Thanks for the detailed review, Sebb. We really appreciate you spending
  your time going through this. Here's the list of TODOs for us:
  1) In the binary bundle:
  a) Fix the copy/paste error for the URL to SQLLine in the NOTICE file
  in the binary bundle as noted by Gabriel here[1].

 It's not clear to me that the SQLLine attribution should even be in
 the NOTICE file.
 Though of course if it must be included, the URL should be correct.

 b) Change developed by to developed at in the NOTICE file
 c) In answer to your question, yes all those projects listed are
 bundled
  with our binary distribution.

 Are you sure?
 Even JUnit and ANTLR?

 Even if they are included, that only means that a LICENSE file entry
 is needed, not necessarily a NOTICE entry.

  2) In the source bundle:
  a) The target dir and rat.txt files should be removed from the src
  bundle

 Yes.

  b) There were the following changes made to the src bundle not
  reflected in git:
- the docs/phoenix.csv file was removed (it's part of our website
 so
  should not be included in our git repo)

 OK

- the build.txt file was modified slightly in the src bundle.

 Not OK.

- the CHANGES file is bundled with the src bundle, but not checked
  into git.

 The source bundle must only contain files contained in the Git tag.

 The point is that the only practical way to ensure that the source
 bundle contains only files that have the appropriate license and are
 allowed to be included in a release is to compare the files with Git
 (or SVN). Otherwise it's impossible to establish provenance and
 difficult to determine if the file has a suitable license.

   - the README.md file is not included in the src bundle, but instead
 a
  README file is included instead.

 The ASF releases source, so source files to create documentation
 should be included.

  For the source binary changes, we could commit and push those changes to
  git and update our 3.0.0 tag. Would that be an acceptable solution?

 Not sure what you are proposing.

 The RC reviewers need to be able to check that the source bundle
 agrees with the tag.
 Also that the NOTICE and LICENSE files in the bundles agree with the
 contents of those bundles and that any bundled code can be released
 under the Apache License.

  Are there more changes necessary to the NOTICE file in the binary bundle?
  Would it be acceptable to fix the URL in the next release? If not, would
 we
  need to go through a dev vote again for the NOTICE file change?

 See above.

  FWIW, we'll automate the generation of our release bundles for our next
  release (and make sure the source matches exactly as well).

  Thanks,
  James
 
  [1]
 
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAA5C_puNoy74jniWMTbx%3DZFyc1itf0w6E4kCHvCOTK_OTfBgmg%40mail.gmail.com%3E
 
 
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org
 wrote:
 
  James, Mujtaba, et. al.,
 
  Can we add a Releasing page to http://phoenix.incubator.apache.org/that
  includes step by step instructions for packaging a Phoenix release. We
 can
  fine tune this process according to feedback received during RCs. This
  could/should include shell commands captured one time through your
 process
  for generating a source tarball from a Git checkout at an exact SHA,
 saving
  off a clean source tarball before running release checks, generating
 binary
  release tarballs, calculating checksums over the tarballs, signing the
  tarballs, etc.
 
 
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:09 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   On 25 March 2014 22:01, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:
Pardon, got -bin and -src crossed mentally, indeed they are there.
   
Looks like src was packaged after running the RAT check.  Does this
   require
a new RC?
  
   If I were the RM I would respin the RC for this sort of packaging
 error.
  
   But in this case there are other more serious errors, the binary
 NOTICE
   file.
  
   And most important, please establish why the Git tag does not agree
   with the source archive, otherwise the new RC may also be faulty in
   that regard.

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread Andrew Phillips
This probably belongs in a [DISCUSS] more than in a [VOTE] thread, but in 
response to Andrew's comment:

 Can we add a Releasing page 
 to http://phoenix.incubator.apache.org/that
 includes step by step instructions for packaging a Phoenix 
 release.

...I was wondering if this might be useful: 
https://wiki.apache.org/jclouds/Releasing%20jclouds. I recall it took us a 
couple of RCs to fine-tune, too.

ap

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 23:06, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 Our binary distribution bundles sqlline which has a BSD Clause 3 license.
 We've included this license with the Apache 2 license in our LICENSE file.
 Do we need to include sqlline in the NOTICE file?

Depends on its license.

 Yes, we bundle ANTLR in our binary distribution. Most of the other items
 are pulled in based on the transitive dependencies of other jars we've
 bundled in our binary distribution.

I see now why I did not notice the 3rd party binaries.
They seem to have been merged into jars which look like phoenix code -
and indeed also contain phoenix code.

That is a very non-standard way to do things, and I think could
mislead end-users as to the provenance of the code.

It's OK to bundle separate jars in a binary release (assuming
licensing etc is OK), but I don't think it's OK to merge 3rd party
code with ASF code in a single jar.
Apart from anything, that will play havoc with Maven and possibly
other dependency management systems.

 That's why we included them in the NOTICE file. Is this correct?

As I already wrote, not necessarily.
You can only include certain license types; in all cases the licenses
must be included in the bundle - either actually included in the
LICENSE file or locally linked from it.
Some licenses may require attribution in the NOTICE file.

See for example

http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps

 Our LICENSE file includes the licenses of all bundled software - either
 Apache 2 or BSD Clause 3.

But there is no indication as to which 3rd party software uses what license.

again, see

http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps

 Please advise, as we're trying to follow the guidelines listed here[1].

As am I ...

 Thanks,
 James

 [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html



 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 22:27, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  Thanks for the detailed review, Sebb. We really appreciate you spending
  your time going through this. Here's the list of TODOs for us:
  1) In the binary bundle:
  a) Fix the copy/paste error for the URL to SQLLine in the NOTICE file
  in the binary bundle as noted by Gabriel here[1].

 It's not clear to me that the SQLLine attribution should even be in
 the NOTICE file.
 Though of course if it must be included, the URL should be correct.

 b) Change developed by to developed at in the NOTICE file
 c) In answer to your question, yes all those projects listed are
 bundled
  with our binary distribution.

 Are you sure?
 Even JUnit and ANTLR?

 Even if they are included, that only means that a LICENSE file entry
 is needed, not necessarily a NOTICE entry.

  2) In the source bundle:
  a) The target dir and rat.txt files should be removed from the src
  bundle

 Yes.

  b) There were the following changes made to the src bundle not
  reflected in git:
- the docs/phoenix.csv file was removed (it's part of our website
 so
  should not be included in our git repo)

 OK

- the build.txt file was modified slightly in the src bundle.

 Not OK.

- the CHANGES file is bundled with the src bundle, but not checked
  into git.

 The source bundle must only contain files contained in the Git tag.

 The point is that the only practical way to ensure that the source
 bundle contains only files that have the appropriate license and are
 allowed to be included in a release is to compare the files with Git
 (or SVN). Otherwise it's impossible to establish provenance and
 difficult to determine if the file has a suitable license.

   - the README.md file is not included in the src bundle, but instead
 a
  README file is included instead.

 The ASF releases source, so source files to create documentation
 should be included.

  For the source binary changes, we could commit and push those changes to
  git and update our 3.0.0 tag. Would that be an acceptable solution?

 Not sure what you are proposing.

 The RC reviewers need to be able to check that the source bundle
 agrees with the tag.
 Also that the NOTICE and LICENSE files in the bundles agree with the
 contents of those bundles and that any bundled code can be released
 under the Apache License.

  Are there more changes necessary to the NOTICE file in the binary bundle?
  Would it be acceptable to fix the URL in the next release? If not, would
 we
  need to go through a dev vote again for the NOTICE file change?

 See above.

  FWIW, we'll automate the generation of our release bundles for our next
  release (and make sure the source matches exactly as well).

  Thanks,
  James
 
  [1]
 
 http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-phoenix-dev/201403.mbox/%3CCAA5C_puNoy74jniWMTbx%3DZFyc1itf0w6E4kCHvCOTK_OTfBgmg%40mail.gmail.com%3E
 
 
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org
 wrote:
 
  James, Mujtaba, et. al.,
 
  Can we add 

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
Ah, I see. Thanks, Sebb. So we should modify our LICENSE file as indicated
in http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps instead
of listing these in our LICENSE file. Since all licenses are either Apache
or BSD, this should be fine.

I'm still a bit confused about one thing, though. The above link says add
a pointer to the dependency's location within the source tree. For
sqlline, we bundle it, but have no source dependencies on it. It's used as
a command line terminal interface. Is this pointer optional then? We could
point to the python script that invokes it - would that be correct?

For our HBase dependencies, we have many places in the source that call
HBase APIs. Do we just list one of them?


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 23:06, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  Our binary distribution bundles sqlline which has a BSD Clause 3 license.
  We've included this license with the Apache 2 license in our LICENSE
 file.
  Do we need to include sqlline in the NOTICE file?

 Depends on its license.

  Yes, we bundle ANTLR in our binary distribution. Most of the other items
  are pulled in based on the transitive dependencies of other jars we've
  bundled in our binary distribution.

 I see now why I did not notice the 3rd party binaries.
 They seem to have been merged into jars which look like phoenix code -
 and indeed also contain phoenix code.

 That is a very non-standard way to do things, and I think could
 mislead end-users as to the provenance of the code.

 It's OK to bundle separate jars in a binary release (assuming
 licensing etc is OK), but I don't think it's OK to merge 3rd party
 code with ASF code in a single jar.
 Apart from anything, that will play havoc with Maven and possibly
 other dependency management systems.

  That's why we included them in the NOTICE file. Is this correct?

 As I already wrote, not necessarily.
 You can only include certain license types; in all cases the licenses
 must be included in the bundle - either actually included in the
 LICENSE file or locally linked from it.
 Some licenses may require attribution in the NOTICE file.

 See for example

 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps

  Our LICENSE file includes the licenses of all bundled software - either
  Apache 2 or BSD Clause 3.

 But there is no indication as to which 3rd party software uses what
 license.

 again, see

 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps

  Please advise, as we're trying to follow the guidelines listed here[1].

 As am I ...

  Thanks,
  James
 
  [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
 
 
 
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On 25 March 2014 22:27, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
   Thanks for the detailed review, Sebb. We really appreciate you
 spending
   your time going through this. Here's the list of TODOs for us:
   1) In the binary bundle:
   a) Fix the copy/paste error for the URL to SQLLine in the NOTICE
 file
   in the binary bundle as noted by Gabriel here[1].
 
  It's not clear to me that the SQLLine attribution should even be in
  the NOTICE file.
  Though of course if it must be included, the URL should be correct.
 
  b) Change developed by to developed at in the NOTICE file
  c) In answer to your question, yes all those projects listed are
  bundled
   with our binary distribution.
 
  Are you sure?
  Even JUnit and ANTLR?
 
  Even if they are included, that only means that a LICENSE file entry
  is needed, not necessarily a NOTICE entry.
 
   2) In the source bundle:
   a) The target dir and rat.txt files should be removed from the src
   bundle
 
  Yes.
 
   b) There were the following changes made to the src bundle not
   reflected in git:
 - the docs/phoenix.csv file was removed (it's part of our
 website
  so
   should not be included in our git repo)
 
  OK
 
 - the build.txt file was modified slightly in the src bundle.
 
  Not OK.
 
 - the CHANGES file is bundled with the src bundle, but not
 checked
   into git.
 
  The source bundle must only contain files contained in the Git tag.
 
  The point is that the only practical way to ensure that the source
  bundle contains only files that have the appropriate license and are
  allowed to be included in a release is to compare the files with Git
  (or SVN). Otherwise it's impossible to establish provenance and
  difficult to determine if the file has a suitable license.
 
- the README.md file is not included in the src bundle, but
 instead
  a
   README file is included instead.
 
  The ASF releases source, so source files to create documentation
  should be included.
 
   For the source binary changes, we could commit and push those changes
 to
   git and update our 3.0.0 tag. Would that be an acceptable solution?
 
  Not sure what you are proposing.
 
  The RC reviewers need to be 

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
(sorry, meant instead of listing these in our NOTICE file)


On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:48 PM, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.orgwrote:

 Ah, I see. Thanks, Sebb. So we should modify our LICENSE file as indicated
 in http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps instead
 of listing these in our LICENSE file. Since all licenses are either Apache
 or BSD, this should be fine.

 I'm still a bit confused about one thing, though. The above link says add
 a pointer to the dependency's location within the source tree. For
 sqlline, we bundle it, but have no source dependencies on it. It's used as
 a command line terminal interface. Is this pointer optional then? We could
 point to the python script that invokes it - would that be correct?

 For our HBase dependencies, we have many places in the source that call
 HBase APIs. Do we just list one of them?


 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 23:06, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  Our binary distribution bundles sqlline which has a BSD Clause 3
 license.
  We've included this license with the Apache 2 license in our LICENSE
 file.
  Do we need to include sqlline in the NOTICE file?

 Depends on its license.

  Yes, we bundle ANTLR in our binary distribution. Most of the other items
  are pulled in based on the transitive dependencies of other jars we've
  bundled in our binary distribution.

 I see now why I did not notice the 3rd party binaries.
 They seem to have been merged into jars which look like phoenix code -
 and indeed also contain phoenix code.

 That is a very non-standard way to do things, and I think could
 mislead end-users as to the provenance of the code.

 It's OK to bundle separate jars in a binary release (assuming
 licensing etc is OK), but I don't think it's OK to merge 3rd party
 code with ASF code in a single jar.
 Apart from anything, that will play havoc with Maven and possibly
 other dependency management systems.

  That's why we included them in the NOTICE file. Is this correct?

 As I already wrote, not necessarily.
 You can only include certain license types; in all cases the licenses
 must be included in the bundle - either actually included in the
 LICENSE file or locally linked from it.
 Some licenses may require attribution in the NOTICE file.

 See for example

 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps

  Our LICENSE file includes the licenses of all bundled software - either
  Apache 2 or BSD Clause 3.

 But there is no indication as to which 3rd party software uses what
 license.

 again, see

 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps

  Please advise, as we're trying to follow the guidelines listed here[1].

 As am I ...

  Thanks,
  James
 
  [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
 
 
 
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On 25 March 2014 22:27, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
   Thanks for the detailed review, Sebb. We really appreciate you
 spending
   your time going through this. Here's the list of TODOs for us:
   1) In the binary bundle:
   a) Fix the copy/paste error for the URL to SQLLine in the NOTICE
 file
   in the binary bundle as noted by Gabriel here[1].
 
  It's not clear to me that the SQLLine attribution should even be in
  the NOTICE file.
  Though of course if it must be included, the URL should be correct.
 
  b) Change developed by to developed at in the NOTICE file
  c) In answer to your question, yes all those projects listed are
  bundled
   with our binary distribution.
 
  Are you sure?
  Even JUnit and ANTLR?
 
  Even if they are included, that only means that a LICENSE file entry
  is needed, not necessarily a NOTICE entry.
 
   2) In the source bundle:
   a) The target dir and rat.txt files should be removed from the
 src
   bundle
 
  Yes.
 
   b) There were the following changes made to the src bundle not
   reflected in git:
 - the docs/phoenix.csv file was removed (it's part of our
 website
  so
   should not be included in our git repo)
 
  OK
 
 - the build.txt file was modified slightly in the src bundle.
 
  Not OK.
 
 - the CHANGES file is bundled with the src bundle, but not
 checked
   into git.
 
  The source bundle must only contain files contained in the Git tag.
 
  The point is that the only practical way to ensure that the source
  bundle contains only files that have the appropriate license and are
  allowed to be included in a release is to compare the files with Git
  (or SVN). Otherwise it's impossible to establish provenance and
  difficult to determine if the file has a suitable license.
 
- the README.md file is not included in the src bundle, but
 instead
  a
   README file is included instead.
 
  The ASF releases source, so source files to create documentation
  should be included.
 
   For the source binary changes, we could commit and push those
 

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 25 March 2014 23:48, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 Ah, I see. Thanks, Sebb. So we should modify our LICENSE file as indicated
 in http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps instead
 of listing these in our LICENSE file. Since all licenses are either Apache
 or BSD, this should be fine.

 I'm still a bit confused about one thing, though. The above link says add
 a pointer to the dependency's location within the source tree. For
 sqlline, we bundle it, but have no source dependencies on it. It's used as
 a command line terminal interface. Is this pointer optional then? We could
 point to the python script that invokes it - would that be correct?

AFAIK the pointer is to the _license_, as shown in the example beneath.
[I'll see about clarifying that]

Since the BSD license is so short, you may prefer to include in the
LICENSE file itself rather than creating a separate file and pointing
to that.
If several products have the identical license, just list them together.
Please include the 3rd party version details (as per the example);
it's not unknown for licenses to change between versions.

 For our HBase dependencies, we have many places in the source that call
 HBase APIs. Do we just list one of them?

HBase is ASF code surely?
So why does it need mentioning? - unless its NOTICE file has some
attributions that relate to what you are bundling


 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 March 2014 23:06, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  Our binary distribution bundles sqlline which has a BSD Clause 3 license.
  We've included this license with the Apache 2 license in our LICENSE
 file.
  Do we need to include sqlline in the NOTICE file?

 Depends on its license.

  Yes, we bundle ANTLR in our binary distribution. Most of the other items
  are pulled in based on the transitive dependencies of other jars we've
  bundled in our binary distribution.

 I see now why I did not notice the 3rd party binaries.
 They seem to have been merged into jars which look like phoenix code -
 and indeed also contain phoenix code.

 That is a very non-standard way to do things, and I think could
 mislead end-users as to the provenance of the code.

 It's OK to bundle separate jars in a binary release (assuming
 licensing etc is OK), but I don't think it's OK to merge 3rd party
 code with ASF code in a single jar.
 Apart from anything, that will play havoc with Maven and possibly
 other dependency management systems.

  That's why we included them in the NOTICE file. Is this correct?

 As I already wrote, not necessarily.
 You can only include certain license types; in all cases the licenses
 must be included in the bundle - either actually included in the
 LICENSE file or locally linked from it.
 Some licenses may require attribution in the NOTICE file.

 See for example

 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps

  Our LICENSE file includes the licenses of all bundled software - either
  Apache 2 or BSD Clause 3.

 But there is no indication as to which 3rd party software uses what
 license.

 again, see

 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps

  Please advise, as we're trying to follow the guidelines listed here[1].

 As am I ...

  Thanks,
  James
 
  [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
 
 
 
  On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 3:48 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  On 25 March 2014 22:27, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
   Thanks for the detailed review, Sebb. We really appreciate you
 spending
   your time going through this. Here's the list of TODOs for us:
   1) In the binary bundle:
   a) Fix the copy/paste error for the URL to SQLLine in the NOTICE
 file
   in the binary bundle as noted by Gabriel here[1].
 
  It's not clear to me that the SQLLine attribution should even be in
  the NOTICE file.
  Though of course if it must be included, the URL should be correct.
 
  b) Change developed by to developed at in the NOTICE file
  c) In answer to your question, yes all those projects listed are
  bundled
   with our binary distribution.
 
  Are you sure?
  Even JUnit and ANTLR?
 
  Even if they are included, that only means that a LICENSE file entry
  is needed, not necessarily a NOTICE entry.
 
   2) In the source bundle:
   a) The target dir and rat.txt files should be removed from the src
   bundle
 
  Yes.
 
   b) There were the following changes made to the src bundle not
   reflected in git:
 - the docs/phoenix.csv file was removed (it's part of our
 website
  so
   should not be included in our git repo)
 
  OK
 
 - the build.txt file was modified slightly in the src bundle.
 
  Not OK.
 
 - the CHANGES file is bundled with the src bundle, but not
 checked
   into git.
 
  The source bundle must only contain files contained in the Git tag.
 
  The point is that the only practical way to ensure that the source
  bundle contains only 

Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:07 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:


 HBase is ASF code surely?
 So why does it need mentioning? - unless its NOTICE file has some
 attributions that relate to what you are bundling


Yes, HBase is ASF code. The other stuff we've listed are the transitive
dependencies of HBase. Do we list then only the non ASF transitive
dependencies in our LICENSE file? I think I was confused by the
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#deps-of-deps instructions.

Would it be ok if I attached a modified LICENSE file for review here? Our
NOTICE file will be modified to include only the bare minimum as described
here: http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#simple

Thanks,
James


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 26 March 2014 00:23, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:07 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:


 HBase is ASF code surely?
 So why does it need mentioning? - unless its NOTICE file has some
 attributions that relate to what you are bundling


 Yes, HBase is ASF code. The other stuff we've listed are the transitive
 dependencies of HBase. Do we list then only the non ASF transitive
 dependencies in our LICENSE file? I think I was confused by the
 http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#deps-of-deps instructions.

What is confusing about that?
If it is not clear, how could it be made clearer?

 Would it be ok if I attached a modified LICENSE file for review here?

Please don't include the full license text.
Just include what you propose to append to the standard AL 2.0 file.

 Our
 NOTICE file will be modified to include only the bare minimum as described
 here: http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#simple

That's fine provided that there are no requirements for attribution,
.
Remember also that the NOTICE (and LICENSE) files relate to the bits
that are bundled so may be different for source and binary releases.

 Thanks,
 James

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org



Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread Andrew Purtell
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

  Yes, we bundle ANTLR in our binary distribution. Most of the other items
  are pulled in based on the transitive dependencies of other jars we've
  bundled in our binary distribution.

 I see now why I did not notice the 3rd party binaries.
 They seem to have been merged into jars which look like phoenix code -
 and indeed also contain phoenix code.

 That is a very non-standard way to do things, and I think could
 mislead end-users as to the provenance of the code.

 It's OK to bundle separate jars in a binary release (assuming
 licensing etc is OK), but I don't think it's OK to merge 3rd party
 code with ASF code in a single jar.
 Apart from anything, that will play havoc with Maven and possibly
 other dependency management systems.


I believe this is done because Phoenix is a JDBC client, and JDBC drivers
are usually packaged as single JARs for convenience. James could confirm or
refute. I concluded this is acceptable practice having seen it elsewhere at
Apache, for example in Apache Pig, their convenience fatjar artifact.


-- 
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:28 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 26 March 2014 00:23, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  I think I was confused by the
  http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#deps-of-depsinstructions.

 What is confusing about that?
 If it is not clear, how could it be made clearer?

 The instructions are clear. It's just not simple to get right. Maybe it's
just one of those things you have to do wrong once. Maybe a simple
end-2-end example would help for a example project with both:
- a non ASF dependency and
- an ASF dependency that include a non ASF dependency


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread James Taylor
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Andrew Purtell apurt...@apache.org wrote:

 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

   Yes, we bundle ANTLR in our binary distribution. Most of the other
 items
   are pulled in based on the transitive dependencies of other jars we've
   bundled in our binary distribution.
 
  I see now why I did not notice the 3rd party binaries.
  They seem to have been merged into jars which look like phoenix code -
  and indeed also contain phoenix code.
 
  That is a very non-standard way to do things, and I think could
  mislead end-users as to the provenance of the code.
 
  It's OK to bundle separate jars in a binary release (assuming
  licensing etc is OK), but I don't think it's OK to merge 3rd party
  code with ASF code in a single jar.
  Apart from anything, that will play havoc with Maven and possibly
  other dependency management systems.


 I believe this is done because Phoenix is a JDBC client, and JDBC drivers
 are usually packaged as single JARs for convenience. James could confirm or
 refute. I concluded this is acceptable practice having seen it elsewhere at
 Apache, for example in Apache Pig, their convenience fatjar artifact.

 Yes, that's correct. It's because then a third-party tool (such as a SQL
client GUI) then only need to pull in a single jar to be able to connect
through the Phoenix JDBC driver to HBase. Our initial (pre-Apache) releases
didn't do this and it was almost impossible to get the classpath correct
for the minimal client-side dependencies.

So the remaining question: should we spin up a new RC for these changes and
if so, should we go through a vote again on our dev list as well?

Thanks again for all the help.

James


Re: [VOTE] Release of Apache Phoenix 3.0.0 incubating RC1

2014-03-25 Thread sebb
On 26 March 2014 00:39, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
 On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:28 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 26 March 2014 00:23, James Taylor jamestay...@apache.org wrote:
  I think I was confused by the
  http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#deps-of-depsinstructions.

 What is confusing about that?
 If it is not clear, how could it be made clearer?

 The instructions are clear. It's just not simple to get right. Maybe it's
 just one of those things you have to do wrong once. Maybe a simple
 end-2-end example would help for a example project with both:
 - a non ASF dependency and
 - an ASF dependency that include a non ASF dependency

Dependencies are irrelevant.

Only the actual contents of the bundle matter.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org