Re: apache at bintray

[Hen]

Given there's an asfinfra user there, it seems official. I doubt the infra
team would be involved otherwise :)

Maybe they have instructions on how to interact with the account?

Hen

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 5:27 AM, Jochen Theodorou  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I was pointed at https://bintray.com/apache. Is that an "official"
> bintray account for apache? Are projects publishing convenience artifacts
> on bintray supposed to use that?
>
> bye Jochen
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

[Hen]

+1 to flagging mentor absence; and I like making it automated otherwise
it's not going to happen (or rather, it'll be up to a podling to flag it
and they're unlikely to feel comfortable doing so).

Justin's two metrics are interesting to me as I (kinda) don't view either
of those as mentor responsibilities.

For me a mentor is:

1) Someone who prods the podling to move along to the next step in its path
in the incubator.
2) Someone who monitors the list for general 'flow'. Is dev happening, does
it seem to be moving along nicely etc.
3) Someone who joins in on exceptional/abnormal threads (ie: when #2 hits
bumps).
4) Someone who deep dives early on in the podlings life to get things
moving.
5) Someone who is reviewing the podling's board report.

For me a mentor is not required to be:

1) Someone who is a coder on the project, or deep in the technology in
question.
2) Someone who votes on how the project chooses to develop, or
3) Someone who votes on the technical choices in the project,
4) Or, someone who is deep diving into release votes once a general cadence
has been set (beyond that need for IPMC +1s).

When a project is ready to graduate, the mentors of the project should be
doing practically nothing with their mentor hat on.

--

Given all that, I would definitely lean towards automated flagging for
mentors when not reviewing the podling's board report.

I'd also have an urge for us to define more specific milestones within
incubation, with more expectation on mentor activity for podlings at
earlier milestones.

Hen


On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > As for the metric -- I really think that using mentor turnout on release
> > voting threads will serve us well.
>
> My concern with using that as a metric is people will just vote +1 without
> doing a thorough check and we may end up with more releases with issues.
>
> Possibly a better metric is how many mentors voted something other than +1
> on a RC, most releases (other than very simple ones) go through a couple of
> RCs before coming to the IPMC.
>
> Another metric is which project releases get a -1 in the IPMC as those
> issue should of been caught by the projects mentors.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version 5.0.0-alpha(3rd round)

[Gao Hongtao]

Hi, Willem 


for question 1
They are for testing only. Should be removed


for question 2
We can reduce the same Apache license files.


We will fix these two in next release. Is that Ok?
Thanks for helps.


 Hongtao Gao






 
---Original---
From: "Willem Jiang"
Date: Mon, Apr 2, 2018 06:19 AM
To: "general";
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version 
5.0.0-alpha(3rd round)


Hi,

I checked the source code and nexus repo release, they are good.
I can build the binary from the source.

But when I go through the License files I have some question want to ask

1. There are some CC Licensed file in the binary release License file.
spdx-exceptions 2.1.0
spdx-license-ids  3.0.0

I did some research out about it and found it just work like a License
check tool.
So my question do we bundle it in the release kit? If we just use it as a
tool to check license, we don't specify it in the License file.

2. There are lots stand ASL License which are list in the License directory.
We could save people some time by reducing the number of stand ASL License
file.  It can be done on next release

 https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b


Willem Jiang

Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
  http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: willem

On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 12:07 PM,  Sheng Wu  wrote:

> Hi All,
> This is a call for vote to release Apache SkyWalking (Incubating) version
> 5.0.0-alpha.
>
>
> The Apache SkyWalking community has tested, voted and approved the proposed
> release of Apache SkyWalking (Incubating) 5.0.0-alpha
>
>
> From last vote:
> 1. Separated the NOTICE and LICENSE in source package and distribution
> 2. Removed the libraries in source package.
> 3. Removed some unnecessary excludes from rat setting.
> 4. Added a missing DISCLAIMER file.
>
>
> We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this
> incubator release.
>
>
> Skywalking is an APM (application performance monitor), especially for
> microservice, Cloud Native and container-based architecture systems.
> Also known as a distributed tracing system.
> It provides an automatic way to instrument applications:
> no need to change any of the source code of the target application;
> and an collector with an very high efficiency streaming module.
>
>
> Vote Thread:
>
>
>  * https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4459517d990e2d0fa879ced5b65c44
> e047191e8b9301e8b6d67f7927@%3Cdev.skywalking.apache.org%3E
>
>
> Result Thread:
>
>
>  * https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c55adf4fa19d6c9ffa76a8d0cf2465
> 90d95d8dd7dead11331346e10b@%3Cdev.skywalking.apache.org%3E
>
>
> Release notes:
>
>
> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.
> 0.0-alpha/CHANGES.md
>
>
> Release Candidate:
>
>
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/skywalking/5.0.0-alpha/
>
>
> Maven 2 staging repository:
>
>
> * https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapacheskywalking-1010/org/apache/skywalking/
>
>
> Release Tag :
>
>
> * 5.0.0-alpha
>
>
> Release CommitID :
>
>
> * 476ae378bed24690628cc0d16108185b7b5580b6
>
>
> Keys to verify the Release Candidate :
>
>
> * http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get=0x2EF5026E70A55777
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/skywalking/
> 5.0.0-alpha/KEYS
>
>
> corresponding to pen...@apache.org
>
>
> Guide to build the release from source :
>
>
> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.
> 0.0-alpha/docs/en/How-to-build.md#build-from-apache-source-codes
>
>
> Voting will start now (March 31th) and will remain open for at least 72
> hours, Request IPMC to give their vote.
> [ ] +1 Release this package.
> [ ] +0 No opinion.
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because
>
>
>
> --
> Sheng Wu
> Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> I reckon I'm a bit confused as well now as I'm not sure what is the correct 
> fix to apply….

In your case it quite simple see [1] Nothing needs to be added to NOTICE for 
MIT or BSD licensed software. You just need to remove the lines and copyright 
notices that refer to any software licensed like that.

Thanks,
Justin

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


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

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

In general just because a TLP does something doesn’t mean it’s in line with 
policy or may have historic reasons for it being that way.

> Apache Hadoop: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/blob/trunk/NOTICE.txt
> Apache Spark: https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE

Have been discussed on this list (several times) before that they are not good 
examples to follow.  Some of the issues come from an upstream NOTICE files that 
also have issues - which is the exact issue we’re trying to prevent.

> Apache HBase: https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/NOTICE.txt
> Apache Ambari: 
> https://github.com/apache/ambari/blob/trunk/ambari-web/app/assets/licenses/NOTICE.txt

And IMO both of those also look to have issues.

> So, isn't enforcing improvements on podling not harsh when it does not
> attracts -1 or blocks releases for other Apache TLP releases?

The incubator has not remit over TLP projects license and notice files. It’s up 
to those PMCs to get it right and they should of learnt that when they went 
through the incubator. If they didn’t them perhaps we need to do things a 
little differently here?

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

Re: Who has the experiences to assemble NOTICE file?

[Willem Jiang]

Here are the link about the apache-resource-bundles[1] that you may use as
well.

[1]https://maven.apache.org/apache-resource-bundles/index.html


Willem Jiang

Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
  http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem

On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Willem Jiang 
wrote:

> Hi Daisy,
>
> As the NOTICE file content is related to License.
> Current we need to go through the License and NOTICE file one by one.
>
> But with the help of maven remote resources plugin[1] that we use,  it's
> easy for us to setup the License and update the NOTICE file by looking up
> the DEPENDENCE file that the plugin generated.
>
> BTW, there are some NOTICE related discussion in the general mailing list
> recently.
> Please do not hesitate to ask the specific NOTICE question here.
>
>
> [1]https://github.com/apache/incubator-servicecomb-saga/
> blob/master/pom.xml#L547
>
>
> Willem Jiang
>
> Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
>   http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
> Twitter: willemjiang
> Weibo: 姜宁willem
>
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Ying Chun Guo 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi, friends
>>
>> I'd like to learn from people who has the experience to assemble the
>> legal NOTICE file before. I need to do this for Apache OpenWhisk repos. I
>> find manually assembling NOTICE is a complex and error-prone task
>> especially for a non-legal person like me. Is there a tool to help on that
>> ? Does anyone share any experiences on that?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>

Re: Who has the experiences to assemble NOTICE file?

[Willem Jiang]

Hi Daisy,

As the NOTICE file content is related to License.
Current we need to go through the License and NOTICE file one by one.

But with the help of maven remote resources plugin[1] that we use,  it's
easy for us to setup the License and update the NOTICE file by looking up
the DEPENDENCE file that the plugin generated.

BTW, there are some NOTICE related discussion in the general mailing list
recently.
Please do not hesitate to ask the specific NOTICE question here.


[1]
https://github.com/apache/incubator-servicecomb-saga/blob/master/pom.xml#L547


Willem Jiang

Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
  http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem

On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 10:29 PM, Ying Chun Guo  wrote:

> Hi, friends
>
> I'd like to learn from people who has the experience to assemble the legal
> NOTICE file before. I need to do this for Apache OpenWhisk repos. I find
> manually assembling NOTICE is a complex and error-prone task especially for
> a non-legal person like me. Is there a tool to help on that ? Does anyone
> share any experiences on that?
>
> Best regards
> Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Olivier Lamy]

I reckon I'm a bit confused as well now as I'm not sure what is the correct
fix to apply
Is there any of the folks who voted -1 to propose some fixes?
via pull request or a patch? the git repo is available here:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-gobblin
This will definitely helps a lot as even with few years of experience here,
I'm really confused about what and how to fix the issue.

Thanks a lot
Olivier

On Mon, 2 Apr 2018 at 09:19, Abhishek Tiwari  wrote:

> Although the vote is over and successful, at this point I think I will just
> update the NOTICE file and bring in another RC for vote.
>
> However, I am puzzled that this improvement (not blocker) is attracting -1
> votes. I would have expected +1 or 0 with improvement suggestion,
> specifically because I see that this is a very common pattern in many if
> not most of the major Apache TLP projects.
> The two entries in our NOTICE file is for: bootstrap and Glyphicon icons.
> And, for exactly the same included bits, here are the NOTICE files for a
> few other major TLPs:
> Apache Hadoop: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/blob/trunk/NOTICE.txt
> <
> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://github.com/apache/hadoop/blob/trunk/NOTICE.txt=D=hangouts=1522643463206000=AFQjCNGI8Ip-PaJG9FI1khGSq5ErPtu6eQ
> >
>
> Apache HBase: https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/NOTICE.txt
> <
> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/NOTICE.txt=D=hangouts=1522643463206000=AFQjCNGuWUiULf55KJuDhruPujU8zDiLhg
> >
>
> Apache Ambari: https://github.com/apache/ambari/blob/trunk/
> ambari-web/app/assets/licenses/NOTICE.txt
> <
> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://github.com/apache/ambari/blob/trunk/ambari-web/app/assets/licenses/NOTICE.txt=D=hangouts=1522643463206000=AFQjCNHhiS9lcjtDZJi0LCRVKBBkiFslmw
> >
>
> Apache Spark: https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> <
> https://www.google.com/url?q=https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE=D=hangouts=1522643463206000=AFQjCNEyNwgI9q--GLEqJJXMLE9gPxD9VQ
> >
>
> .. there are many more, but I stopped at these.
>
> So, isn't enforcing improvements on podling not harsh when it does not
> attracts -1 or blocks releases for other Apache TLP releases?
>
> Abhishek
>
> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Justin Mclean 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > It's hard to come up with a single simple sentence that applies in all
> > cases. So when I said "if something is bundled then it's license and
> > copyright needs to be in LICENSE not NOTICE.” I’m wrong as it's not going
> > to all cover all cases.
> >
> > For bundling Apache licensed (v2) bits of software the copyright isn’t in
> > the license. If the software has a NOTICE file then that is very likely
> > going to effect your NOTICE file - which I think what Sebb was getting at
> > and this is certainly the most common situation.
> >
> > In general other permissive licenses (like MIT and BSD) include a
> > copyright line in the license text and theres’s no need to include
> anything
> > in NOTICE.
> >
> > Then we come to required notices which are going to be uncommon. The
> > licenses with required notices (ignoring ALv2) that I know of are the BSD
> > with advertising clause (Category X), CDDL (list of modifications and how
> > to get source) and MPL (info how to get source code) which are both
> > Category B. None of these would be bundled in a source release (but may
> > affect a binary one). I can’t think of any category A license which has a
> > required notices. Does anyone know of one?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>


-- 
Olivier Lamy
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Abhishek Tiwari]

Although the vote is over and successful, at this point I think I will just
update the NOTICE file and bring in another RC for vote.

However, I am puzzled that this improvement (not blocker) is attracting -1
votes. I would have expected +1 or 0 with improvement suggestion,
specifically because I see that this is a very common pattern in many if
not most of the major Apache TLP projects.
The two entries in our NOTICE file is for: bootstrap and Glyphicon icons.
And, for exactly the same included bits, here are the NOTICE files for a
few other major TLPs:
Apache Hadoop: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/blob/trunk/NOTICE.txt


Apache HBase: https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/NOTICE.txt


Apache Ambari: https://github.com/apache/ambari/blob/trunk/
ambari-web/app/assets/licenses/NOTICE.txt


Apache Spark: https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE


.. there are many more, but I stopped at these.

So, isn't enforcing improvements on podling not harsh when it does not
attracts -1 or blocks releases for other Apache TLP releases?

Abhishek

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 3:12 PM, Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> It's hard to come up with a single simple sentence that applies in all
> cases. So when I said "if something is bundled then it's license and
> copyright needs to be in LICENSE not NOTICE.” I’m wrong as it's not going
> to all cover all cases.
>
> For bundling Apache licensed (v2) bits of software the copyright isn’t in
> the license. If the software has a NOTICE file then that is very likely
> going to effect your NOTICE file - which I think what Sebb was getting at
> and this is certainly the most common situation.
>
> In general other permissive licenses (like MIT and BSD) include a
> copyright line in the license text and theres’s no need to include anything
> in NOTICE.
>
> Then we come to required notices which are going to be uncommon. The
> licenses with required notices (ignoring ALv2) that I know of are the BSD
> with advertising clause (Category X), CDDL (list of modifications and how
> to get source) and MPL (info how to get source code) which are both
> Category B. None of these would be bundled in a source release (but may
> affect a binary one). I can’t think of any category A license which has a
> required notices. Does anyone know of one?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

[Luciano Resende]

Clutch is available at :
http://incubator.apache.org/clutch/

See Mentors project section for a list of podlings and its mentors.

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 1:26 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:

>
> On Apr 1, 2018, at 1:15 PM, Shane Curcuru  wrote:
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote on 4/1/18 10:19 AM:
>
> Would it be possible to generate a short list of all current
> mentors for all current podlings to see how many podlings
> each mentor is signed up for? That would be a good metric
> to know.
>
>
> Presuming podlings.xml is kept updated:
>
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/
> content/podlings.xml
>
> That now sorts by @status first, so current podlings are on top.  That's
> separate from whimsy cross-checks of what's listed in board reports and
> actual signoffs.
>
>
> The clutch runs periodically and generates https://svn.apache.
> org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/clutch/clutchm.ent
>
> This file has each mentor listed. There are duplicates lines when people
> have variations on their names in the date in podlings.xml. Probably there
> needs to be a fix to use username attribute and not the mentor value in the
> clutch.py program.
>
> I can see people in the list who probably don’t even think they are a
> mentor to a podling.
>
> Should we send a note to all mentors recorded asking if they are still
> engaged?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
> --
>
> - Shane
>  Director & Member
>  The Apache Software Foundation
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>


-- 
Luciano Resende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version 5.0.0-alpha (3rd round)

[Willem Jiang]

Hi,

I checked the source code and nexus repo release, they are good.
I can build the binary from the source.

But when I go through the License files I have some question want to ask

1. There are some CC Licensed file in the binary release License file.
spdx-exceptions 2.1.0
spdx-license-ids  3.0.0

I did some research out about it and found it just work like a License
check tool.
So my question do we bundle it in the release kit? If we just use it as a
tool to check license, we don't specify it in the License file.

2. There are lots stand ASL License which are list in the License directory.
We could save people some time by reducing the number of stand ASL License
file.  It can be done on next release

 https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b


Willem Jiang

Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
  http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem

On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 12:07 PM, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:

> Hi All,
> This is a call for vote to release Apache SkyWalking (Incubating) version
> 5.0.0-alpha.
>
>
> The Apache SkyWalking community has tested, voted and approved the proposed
> release of Apache SkyWalking (Incubating) 5.0.0-alpha
>
>
> From last vote:
> 1. Separated the NOTICE and LICENSE in source package and distribution
> 2. Removed the libraries in source package.
> 3. Removed some unnecessary excludes from rat setting.
> 4. Added a missing DISCLAIMER file.
>
>
> We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on this
> incubator release.
>
>
> Skywalking is an APM (application performance monitor), especially for
> microservice, Cloud Native and container-based architecture systems.
> Also known as a distributed tracing system.
> It provides an automatic way to instrument applications:
> no need to change any of the source code of the target application;
> and an collector with an very high efficiency streaming module.
>
>
> Vote Thread:
>
>
>  * https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4459517d990e2d0fa879ced5b65c44
> e047191e8b9301e8b6d67f7927@%3Cdev.skywalking.apache.org%3E
>
>
> Result Thread:
>
>
>  * https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c55adf4fa19d6c9ffa76a8d0cf2465
> 90d95d8dd7dead11331346e10b@%3Cdev.skywalking.apache.org%3E
>
>
> Release notes:
>
>
> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.
> 0.0-alpha/CHANGES.md
>
>
> Release Candidate:
>
>
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/skywalking/5.0.0-alpha/
>
>
> Maven 2 staging repository:
>
>
> * https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapacheskywalking-1010/org/apache/skywalking/
>
>
> Release Tag :
>
>
> * 5.0.0-alpha
>
>
> Release CommitID :
>
>
> * 476ae378bed24690628cc0d16108185b7b5580b6
>
>
> Keys to verify the Release Candidate :
>
>
> * http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get=0x2EF5026E70A55777
> * https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/skywalking/
> 5.0.0-alpha/KEYS
>
>
> corresponding to pen...@apache.org
>
>
> Guide to build the release from source :
>
>
> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.
> 0.0-alpha/docs/en/How-to-build.md#build-from-apache-source-codes
>
>
> Voting will start now (March 31th) and will remain open for at least 72
> hours, Request IPMC to give their vote.
> [ ] +1 Release this package.
> [ ] +0 No opinion.
> [ ] -1 Do not release this package because
>
>
>
> --
> Sheng Wu
> Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

It's hard to come up with a single simple sentence that applies in all cases. 
So when I said "if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs 
to be in LICENSE not NOTICE.” I’m wrong as it's not going to all cover all 
cases.

For bundling Apache licensed (v2) bits of software the copyright isn’t in the 
license. If the software has a NOTICE file then that is very likely going to 
effect your NOTICE file - which I think what Sebb was getting at and this is 
certainly the most common situation.

In general other permissive licenses (like MIT and BSD) include a copyright 
line in the license text and theres’s no need to include anything in NOTICE.

Then we come to required notices which are going to be uncommon. The licenses 
with required notices (ignoring ALv2) that I know of are the BSD with 
advertising clause (Category X), CDDL (list of modifications and how to get 
source) and MPL (info how to get source code) which are both Category B. None 
of these would be bundled in a source release (but may affect a binary one). I 
can’t think of any category A license which has a required notices. Does anyone 
know of one?

Thanks,
Justin


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

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

[Dave Fisher]

> On Apr 1, 2018, at 1:15 PM, Shane Curcuru  wrote:
> 
> Jim Jagielski wrote on 4/1/18 10:19 AM:
>> Would it be possible to generate a short list of all current
>> mentors for all current podlings to see how many podlings
>> each mentor is signed up for? That would be a good metric
>> to know.
> 
> Presuming podlings.xml is kept updated:
> 
> 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml
> 
> That now sorts by @status first, so current podlings are on top.  That's
> separate from whimsy cross-checks of what's listed in board reports and
> actual signoffs.

The clutch runs periodically and generates 
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/clutch/clutchm.ent
 


This file has each mentor listed. There are duplicates lines when people have 
variations on their names in the date in podlings.xml. Probably there needs to 
be a fix to use username attribute and not the mentor value in the clutch.py 
program.

I can see people in the list who probably don’t even think they are a mentor to 
a podling.

Should we send a note to all mentors recorded asking if they are still engaged?

Regards,
Dave

> 
> --
> 
> - Shane
>  Director & Member
>  The Apache Software Foundation
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

[Shane Curcuru]

Jim Jagielski wrote on 4/1/18 10:19 AM:
> Would it be possible to generate a short list of all current
> mentors for all current podlings to see how many podlings
> each mentor is signed up for? That would be a good metric
> to know.

Presuming podlings.xml is kept updated:


https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml

That now sorts by @status first, so current podlings are on top.  That's
separate from whimsy cross-checks of what's listed in board reports and
actual signoffs.

-- 

- Shane
  Director & Member
  The Apache Software Foundation

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

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Apr 1, 2018, at 10:48 AM, sebb  wrote:
> 
> 
> I don't think that is true; I think bundled bits can affect the NOTICE
> file (albeit perhaps rarely).

That is my position as well, fwiw.

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[sebb]

On 1 April 2018 at 15:29, Jim Jagielski  wrote:
>
>
>> On Apr 1, 2018, at 9:35 AM, sebb  wrote:
>>
>>
>> If bundled bits never affect the NOTICE file, why is there a concern
>> about minimising the NOTICE contents?
>>
>
> Let's consider the "touch points" between what we release and
> the downstream user and consumer eco-system. For these
> entities, the 3 "main" files that affect what they can do, as well
> as information that is of primary importance that determines
> their responsibilities are the README, LICENSE and NOTICE
> files:
>
>   o README: because it is the main communication channel between
> the project and downstream
>   o LICENSE: because it provides the distribution requirements
> and conditions
>   o NOTICE: because it provides the addition information that
> is required to be maintained and "transparent" for the
> downstream
>
> In many ways, NOTICE is extra data that must be included
> for all subsequent downstream and distros and, therefore,
> should include only what MUST be folded into the file. That's
> why it is defined as such ("... and nothing more"). We want
> to minimize extraneous work and efforts required for downstreams
> in order to make the use and consumption of Apache code and
> projects as easy as possible. A bloated NOTICE with lots
> of duplicate information unnecessarily adds addition workload
> and, esp, oversight.

Agreed, but I think you may have misunderstood why I wrote:

>> If bundled bits never affect the NOTICE file, why is there a concern
>> about minimising the NOTICE contents?

To my mind, your reply addresses the latter part of the sentence only.

My point was that NOTICE files need to be minimised because otherwise
bundled bits can cause it to become bloated.
i.e. bundled bits *can* affect the NOTICE file.
If bundled bits did not affect the NOTICE file then the file would not
contain anything more than the bare minimum.

I read Justin's statement to imply that bundled bits do not affect the
NOTICE file.
I don't think that is true; I think bundled bits can affect the NOTICE
file (albeit perhaps rarely).

>
> -
> 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] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Jim Jagielski]

> On Apr 1, 2018, at 9:35 AM, sebb  wrote:
> 
> 
> If bundled bits never affect the NOTICE file, why is there a concern
> about minimising the NOTICE contents?
> 

Let's consider the "touch points" between what we release and
the downstream user and consumer eco-system. For these
entities, the 3 "main" files that affect what they can do, as well
as information that is of primary importance that determines
their responsibilities are the README, LICENSE and NOTICE
files:

  o README: because it is the main communication channel between
the project and downstream
  o LICENSE: because it provides the distribution requirements
and conditions
  o NOTICE: because it provides the addition information that
is required to be maintained and "transparent" for the
downstream

In many ways, NOTICE is extra data that must be included
for all subsequent downstream and distros and, therefore,
should include only what MUST be folded into the file. That's
why it is defined as such ("... and nothing more"). We want
to minimize extraneous work and efforts required for downstreams
in order to make the use and consumption of Apache code and
projects as easy as possible. A bloated NOTICE with lots
of duplicate information unnecessarily adds addition workload
and, esp, oversight.


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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)

[???? Sheng Wu]

Hi Sebb


Even more, I and SkyWalking community welcome you to help us, your English and 
English document experiences are much better. So if you have time, please 
consider to send a pull request to help us organize the documents better. We 
also can chat more at there.


Thanks a lot.


--
Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member


 




-- Original --
From:  " Sheng Wu";
Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 10:11 PM
To:  "general";

Subject:  Re:  [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)



Hi Sebb.


I also want to make this more clear, since several people asked before. But the 
tag/release pages from GitHub, have no place to write build notice. Do you have 
any suggestion?


And for using git submodules, there are several requirements, we didn't use 
that from beginning.
1. SkyWalking community are building nodejs, C#, golang sdk/agent based on 
SkyWalking protocol, that is why SkyWalking protocol repo existed.
2. SkyWalking UI is very complex, and no Java tech stack related. The ci, tests 
are all Nodejs and react related.


--
Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member


 




-- Original --
From:  "sebb";
Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 09:31 PM
To:  "general";

Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)



Agreed that the Zip/Clone URLs on the GitHub page are not a canonical source.

However it's not at all obvious that using these links will not
actually create a copy of the full source, as I found out.

If it is not possible to update GitHub settings so that the Zip is
complete, then it would be useful if the relevant part of the
documentation made this clear.

AFAIK Git projects with submodules are relatively rare, so IMO
projects that use the feature should make it clear.

On 1 April 2018 at 14:23, peng-yongsheng <8082...@qq.com> wrote:
> Maybe the source codes tar in github is not pass through this voting process.
>
> ??
> Yongsheng Peng
> Apache SkyWalking PPMC member
>
>
>
>> ?? 2018??4??121:18?? Sheng Wu  ??
>>
>> Hi Sebb
>>
>>
>>> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
>>> include the submodules.
>>> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
>>> contents as well.
>>
>> Actually I don't know the way to do so. Even there is, Apache may more 
>> prefer to use their own source codes tar ball than the github, right?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sheng Wu
>> Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Original --
>> From:  "sebb";
>> Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 09:12 PM
>> To:  "general";
>>
>> Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
>> version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1 April 2018 at 14:03, John D. Ament  wrote:
>>> From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.
>>>
>>> Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
>>> Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
>>> checkout, which IMHO is just fine.
>>>
>>> It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using the
>>> --recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in
>>>
>>> Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
>>> remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
>>> Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
>>> Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git)
>>> registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
>>> Submodule 'skywalking-ui' 
>>> (https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
>>> registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
>>> Cloning into
>>> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
>>> remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
>>> Cloning into
>>> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
>>> remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268
>>>
>>> Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
>>> Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
>>> 'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
>>> 

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

[Jim Jagielski]

Would it be possible to generate a short list of all current
mentors for all current podlings to see how many podlings
each mentor is signed up for? That would be a good metric
to know.

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

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Jim Jagielski]

I am also going to vote -1 for the same reason. It seems to me that
simply fixing this issue is all that's required for a successful RC3 and GA.

> On Mar 31, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> -1 binding as NOTICE should not contain copyrights of bundled 3rd party 
> software. The NOTICE file needs to only contain what is required  (and not 
> already in LICENSE) and needs to be as small as possible as it affects 
> downstream projects. [2]
> 
> I checked:
> - incubating in name
> - signatures and hashes good
> - DISCLAIMER exists
> - LICENSE is missing info for fonts [1]
> - NOTICE is incorrect
> - Some .sh files are missing ASF headers
> - Can compile from source
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 
> 1. 
> apache-gobblin-incubating-sources-0.12.0/gobblin-admin/src/main/resources/static/fonts/*
> 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
> 
> 
> 
> -
> 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 Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)

[???? Sheng Wu]

Hi Sebb.


I also want to make this more clear, since several people asked before. But the 
tag/release pages from GitHub, have no place to write build notice. Do you have 
any suggestion?


And for using git submodules, there are several requirements, we didn't use 
that from beginning.
1. SkyWalking community are building nodejs, C#, golang sdk/agent based on 
SkyWalking protocol, that is why SkyWalking protocol repo existed.
2. SkyWalking UI is very complex, and no Java tech stack related. The ci, tests 
are all Nodejs and react related.


--
Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member


 




-- Original --
From:  "sebb";
Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 09:31 PM
To:  "general";

Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)



Agreed that the Zip/Clone URLs on the GitHub page are not a canonical source.

However it's not at all obvious that using these links will not
actually create a copy of the full source, as I found out.

If it is not possible to update GitHub settings so that the Zip is
complete, then it would be useful if the relevant part of the
documentation made this clear.

AFAIK Git projects with submodules are relatively rare, so IMO
projects that use the feature should make it clear.

On 1 April 2018 at 14:23, peng-yongsheng <8082...@qq.com> wrote:
> Maybe the source codes tar in github is not pass through this voting process.
>
> ??
> Yongsheng Peng
> Apache SkyWalking PPMC member
>
>
>
>> ?? 2018??4??121:18?? Sheng Wu  ??
>>
>> Hi Sebb
>>
>>
>>> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
>>> include the submodules.
>>> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
>>> contents as well.
>>
>> Actually I don't know the way to do so. Even there is, Apache may more 
>> prefer to use their own source codes tar ball than the github, right?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sheng Wu
>> Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Original --
>> From:  "sebb";
>> Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 09:12 PM
>> To:  "general";
>>
>> Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
>> version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1 April 2018 at 14:03, John D. Ament  wrote:
>>> From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.
>>>
>>> Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
>>> Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
>>> checkout, which IMHO is just fine.
>>>
>>> It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using the
>>> --recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in
>>>
>>> Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
>>> remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
>>> Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
>>> Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git)
>>> registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
>>> Submodule 'skywalking-ui' 
>>> (https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
>>> registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
>>> Cloning into
>>> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
>>> remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
>>> Cloning into
>>> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
>>> remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268
>>>
>>> Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
>>> Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
>>> 'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
>>> Submodule path 'skywalking-ui': checked out
>>> '922c012efd0c385e3c502d06d2730c73452f779d'
>>>
>>>
>>> and then the checks that Sebb is trying should work.
>>>
>>> Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?
>>
>> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
>> include the submodules.
>>
>> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
>> contents as well.
>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:49 AM sebb  wrote:
>>>
 On 1 April 2018 at 01:43,  Sheng Wu  wrote:
> Hi sebb,
>
>
> I see your point, that is why we provide 

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[sebb]

On 1 April 2018 at 14:15, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> I have not looked at the NOTICE file.
>
> Perhaps your should as my statements was in context to that.
>
>> "if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs to be
>> in LICENSE not NOTICE."
>>
>> As noted above, I don't think that is true.
>
> For what licenses do you think this is not true? license information always 
> goes in license and the license text usually includes the copyright so 
> there’s no need to duplicate it in notice.

Does https://www.apache.org/licenses/example-NOTICE.txt count?

If bundled bits never affect the NOTICE file, why is there a concern
about minimising the NOTICE contents?

> Thanks,
> Justin

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

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)

[sebb]

Agreed that the Zip/Clone URLs on the GitHub page are not a canonical source.

However it's not at all obvious that using these links will not
actually create a copy of the full source, as I found out.

If it is not possible to update GitHub settings so that the Zip is
complete, then it would be useful if the relevant part of the
documentation made this clear.

AFAIK Git projects with submodules are relatively rare, so IMO
projects that use the feature should make it clear.

On 1 April 2018 at 14:23, peng-yongsheng <8082...@qq.com> wrote:
> Maybe the source codes tar in github is not pass through this voting process.
>
> —
> Yongsheng Peng
> Apache SkyWalking PPMC member
>
>
>
>> 在 2018年4月1日，21:18，吴晟 Sheng Wu  写道：
>>
>> Hi Sebb
>>
>>
>>> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
>>> include the submodules.
>>> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
>>> contents as well.
>>
>> Actually I don't know the way to do so. Even there is, Apache may more 
>> prefer to use their own source codes tar ball than the github, right?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sheng Wu
>> Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Original --
>> From:  "sebb";
>> Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 09:12 PM
>> To:  "general";
>>
>> Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
>> version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1 April 2018 at 14:03, John D. Ament  wrote:
>>> From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.
>>>
>>> Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
>>> Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
>>> checkout, which IMHO is just fine.
>>>
>>> It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using the
>>> --recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in
>>>
>>> Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
>>> remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
>>> Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
>>> Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git)
>>> registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
>>> Submodule 'skywalking-ui' 
>>> (https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
>>> registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
>>> Cloning into
>>> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
>>> remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
>>> Cloning into
>>> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
>>> remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
>>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
>>> remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268
>>>
>>> Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
>>> Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
>>> Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
>>> 'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
>>> Submodule path 'skywalking-ui': checked out
>>> '922c012efd0c385e3c502d06d2730c73452f779d'
>>>
>>>
>>> and then the checks that Sebb is trying should work.
>>>
>>> Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?
>>
>> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
>> include the submodules.
>>
>> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
>> contents as well.
>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:49 AM sebb  wrote:
>>>
 On 1 April 2018 at 01:43, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:
> Hi sebb,
>
>
> I see your point, that is why we provide the build document[1] if you
 want to build from GitHub tag. Git submodules are used in our project for
 binding multi repos. The source codes tar is provided by running some
 source code release process, by following project document[2] and script
 [3].

 I see.
 So cloning the Git repo is not sufficient to get all the code (unless
 there is an option to automatically include submodules that I have
 missed).

>
> And for `dependency-reduced-pom.xml`, it is generated in building the
 project, when we run build and tar source code. If you think we should not
 include it, I think we can add an exclusion in next release.

 That would be a good idea.

>
> Is that good enough for you?

 I think there is a problem with the build process, because the source
 artifact contains other items that are not in Git.

 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)

[peng-yongsheng]

Maybe the source codes tar in github is not pass through this voting process.

—
Yongsheng Peng
Apache SkyWalking PPMC member



> 在 2018年4月1日，21:18，吴晟 Sheng Wu  写道：
> 
> Hi Sebb
> 
> 
>> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
>> include the submodules.
>> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
>> contents as well.
> 
> Actually I don't know the way to do so. Even there is, Apache may more prefer 
> to use their own source codes tar ball than the github, right?
> 
> 
> --
> Sheng Wu
> Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- Original --
> From:  "sebb";
> Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 09:12 PM
> To:  "general";
> 
> Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
> version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)
> 
> 
> 
> On 1 April 2018 at 14:03, John D. Ament  wrote:
>> From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.
>> 
>> Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
>> Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
>> checkout, which IMHO is just fine.
>> 
>> It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using the
>> --recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in
>> 
>> Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
>> remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
>> remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
>> Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
>> Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
>> Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git)
>> registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
>> Submodule 'skywalking-ui' (https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
>> registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
>> Cloning into
>> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
>> remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
>> remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
>> Cloning into
>> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
>> remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
>> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
>> remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268
>> 
>> Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
>> Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
>> Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
>> 'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
>> Submodule path 'skywalking-ui': checked out
>> '922c012efd0c385e3c502d06d2730c73452f779d'
>> 
>> 
>> and then the checks that Sebb is trying should work.
>> 
>> Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?
> 
> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
> include the submodules.
> 
> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
> contents as well.
> 
>> John
>> 
>> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:49 AM sebb  wrote:
>> 
>>> On 1 April 2018 at 01:43, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:
 Hi sebb,
 
 
 I see your point, that is why we provide the build document[1] if you
>>> want to build from GitHub tag. Git submodules are used in our project for
>>> binding multi repos. The source codes tar is provided by running some
>>> source code release process, by following project document[2] and script
>>> [3].
>>> 
>>> I see.
>>> So cloning the Git repo is not sufficient to get all the code (unless
>>> there is an option to automatically include submodules that I have
>>> missed).
>>> 
 
 And for `dependency-reduced-pom.xml`, it is generated in building the
>>> project, when we run build and tar source code. If you think we should not
>>> include it, I think we can add an exclusion in next release.
>>> 
>>> That would be a good idea.
>>> 
 
 Is that good enough for you?
>>> 
>>> I think there is a problem with the build process, because the source
>>> artifact contains other items that are not in Git.
>>> 
>>> $ diff -r incubator-skywalking/
>>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha
>>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .git
>>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .github
>>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .gitignore
>>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .travis.yml
>>> Only in incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto: .git
>>> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent:
>>> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>>> Only in
>>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
>>> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>>> Only in
>>> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)

[???? Sheng Wu]

Hi Sebb


> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
> include the submodules.
> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
> contents as well.

Actually I don't know the way to do so. Even there is, Apache may more prefer 
to use their own source codes tar ball than the github, right?


--
Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member


 




-- Original --
From:  "sebb";
Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 09:12 PM
To:  "general";

Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)



On 1 April 2018 at 14:03, John D. Ament  wrote:
> From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.
>
> Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
> Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
> checkout, which IMHO is just fine.
>
> It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using the
> --recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in
>
> Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
> remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
> remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
> Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
> Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git)
> registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
> Submodule 'skywalking-ui' (https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
> registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
> Cloning into
> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
> remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
> remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
> Cloning into
> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
> remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
> remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268
>
> Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
> Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
> 'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
> Submodule path 'skywalking-ui': checked out
> '922c012efd0c385e3c502d06d2730c73452f779d'
>
>
> and then the checks that Sebb is trying should work.
>
> Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?

Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
include the submodules.

Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
contents as well.

> John
>
> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:49 AM sebb  wrote:
>
>> On 1 April 2018 at 01:43,  Sheng Wu  wrote:
>> > Hi sebb,
>> >
>> >
>> > I see your point, that is why we provide the build document[1] if you
>> want to build from GitHub tag. Git submodules are used in our project for
>> binding multi repos. The source codes tar is provided by running some
>> source code release process, by following project document[2] and script
>> [3].
>>
>> I see.
>> So cloning the Git repo is not sufficient to get all the code (unless
>> there is an option to automatically include submodules that I have
>> missed).
>>
>> >
>> > And for `dependency-reduced-pom.xml`, it is generated in building the
>> project, when we run build and tar source code. If you think we should not
>> include it, I think we can add an exclusion in next release.
>>
>> That would be a good idea.
>>
>> >
>> > Is that good enough for you?
>>
>> I think there is a problem with the build process, because the source
>> artifact contains other items that are not in Git.
>>
>> $ diff -r incubator-skywalking/
>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .git
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .github
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .gitignore
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .travis.yml
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto: .git
>> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent:
>> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>> Only in
>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
>> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>> Only in
>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
>> file:
>> Only in
>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-toolkit-activation/apm-toolkit-log4j-1.x-activation:
>> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: docs
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .git
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .gitignore
>> Only in 

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> I have not looked at the NOTICE file.

Perhaps your should as my statements was in context to that.

> "if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs to be
> in LICENSE not NOTICE."
> 
> As noted above, I don't think that is true.

For what licenses do you think this is not true? license information always 
goes in license and the license text usually includes the copyright so there’s 
no need to duplicate it in notice.

Thanks,
Justin

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rd round)

[John D. Ament]

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 9:12 AM sebb  wrote:

> On 1 April 2018 at 14:03, John D. Ament  wrote:
> > From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.
> >
> > Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
> > Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
> > checkout, which IMHO is just fine.
> >
> > It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using
> the
> > --recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in
> >
> > Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
> > remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
> > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
> > remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
> > Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
> > Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
> > Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git
> )
> > registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
> > Submodule 'skywalking-ui' (
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
> > registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
> > Cloning into
> >
> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
> > remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
> > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
> > remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
> > Cloning into
> > '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
> > remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
> > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
> > remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268
> >
> > Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
> > Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
> > Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
> > 'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
> > Submodule path 'skywalking-ui': checked out
> > '922c012efd0c385e3c502d06d2730c73452f779d'
> >
> >
> > and then the checks that Sebb is trying should work.
> >
> > Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?
>
> Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
> include the submodules.
>
> Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
> contents as well.
>

I don't believe we treat the github download zip as a canonical release
(e.g. its contents need not match) but it may be worth getting it clarified
in policy.


>
> > John
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:49 AM sebb  wrote:
> >
> >> On 1 April 2018 at 01:43, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:
> >> > Hi sebb,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I see your point, that is why we provide the build document[1] if you
> >> want to build from GitHub tag. Git submodules are used in our project
> for
> >> binding multi repos. The source codes tar is provided by running some
> >> source code release process, by following project document[2] and script
> >> [3].
> >>
> >> I see.
> >> So cloning the Git repo is not sufficient to get all the code (unless
> >> there is an option to automatically include submodules that I have
> >> missed).
> >>
> >> >
> >> > And for `dependency-reduced-pom.xml`, it is generated in building the
> >> project, when we run build and tar source code. If you think we should
> not
> >> include it, I think we can add an exclusion in next release.
> >>
> >> That would be a good idea.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Is that good enough for you?
> >>
> >> I think there is a problem with the build process, because the source
> >> artifact contains other items that are not in Git.
> >>
> >> $ diff -r incubator-skywalking/
> >> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .git
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .github
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .gitignore
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .travis.yml
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto:
> .git
> >> Only in
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent:
> >> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> >> Only in
> >> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
> >> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> >> Only in
> >> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
> >> file:
> >> Only in
> >>
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-toolkit-activation/apm-toolkit-log4j-1.x-activation:
> >> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/: docs
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .git
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .gitignore
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .travis.yml
> >> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/skywalking-ui: etc
> >> Only in incubator-skywalking/: tools
> >>
> >> In the above listing, incubator-skywalking is the git clone produced by:
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)

[???? Sheng Wu]

Hi John


> Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?


That checkout command should work form your log and my experience. We provided 
a different document : 
https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.0.0-alpha/docs/en/How-to-build.md#build-from-github
 . The result is same, the reason we put documents in that way is, some one in 
our community is using GUI tool, such as source tree. We are trying to separate 
the steps.



--
Sheng Wu
Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member


 




-- Original --
From:  "John D. Ament";
Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 09:03 PM
To:  "general";

Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
version5.0.0-alpha(3rdround)



From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.

Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
checkout, which IMHO is just fine.

It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using the
--recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in

Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git)
registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
Submodule 'skywalking-ui' (https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
Cloning into
'/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
Cloning into
'/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268

Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
Submodule path 'skywalking-ui': checked out
'922c012efd0c385e3c502d06d2730c73452f779d'


and then the checks that Sebb is trying should work.

Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?

John

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:49 AM sebb  wrote:

> On 1 April 2018 at 01:43,  Sheng Wu  wrote:
> > Hi sebb,
> >
> >
> > I see your point, that is why we provide the build document[1] if you
> want to build from GitHub tag. Git submodules are used in our project for
> binding multi repos. The source codes tar is provided by running some
> source code release process, by following project document[2] and script
> [3].
>
> I see.
> So cloning the Git repo is not sufficient to get all the code (unless
> there is an option to automatically include submodules that I have
> missed).
>
> >
> > And for `dependency-reduced-pom.xml`, it is generated in building the
> project, when we run build and tar source code. If you think we should not
> include it, I think we can add an exclusion in next release.
>
> That would be a good idea.
>
> >
> > Is that good enough for you?
>
> I think there is a problem with the build process, because the source
> artifact contains other items that are not in Git.
>
> $ diff -r incubator-skywalking/
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .git
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .github
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .gitignore
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .travis.yml
> Only in incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto: .git
> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent:
> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> Only in
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> Only in
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
> file:
> Only in
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-toolkit-activation/apm-toolkit-log4j-1.x-activation:
> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: docs
> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .git
> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .gitignore
> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .travis.yml
> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/skywalking-ui: etc
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: tools
>
> In the above listing, incubator-skywalking is the git clone produced by:
> $ git clone --depth 1
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rd round)

[sebb]

On 1 April 2018 at 14:03, John D. Ament  wrote:
> From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.
>
> Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
> Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
> checkout, which IMHO is just fine.
>
> It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using the
> --recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in
>
> Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
> remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
> remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
> Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
> Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git)
> registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
> Submodule 'skywalking-ui' (https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
> registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
> Cloning into
> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
> remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
> remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
> Cloning into
> '/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
> remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
> remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268
>
> Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
> Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
> 'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
> Submodule path 'skywalking-ui': checked out
> '922c012efd0c385e3c502d06d2730c73452f779d'
>
>
> and then the checks that Sebb is trying should work.
>
> Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?

Also, when GitHub is used to grab the code as a Zip, it does not
include the submodules.

Maybe there is a setting that can tell GitHub to adjust the Zip
contents as well.

> John
>
> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:49 AM sebb  wrote:
>
>> On 1 April 2018 at 01:43, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:
>> > Hi sebb,
>> >
>> >
>> > I see your point, that is why we provide the build document[1] if you
>> want to build from GitHub tag. Git submodules are used in our project for
>> binding multi repos. The source codes tar is provided by running some
>> source code release process, by following project document[2] and script
>> [3].
>>
>> I see.
>> So cloning the Git repo is not sufficient to get all the code (unless
>> there is an option to automatically include submodules that I have
>> missed).
>>
>> >
>> > And for `dependency-reduced-pom.xml`, it is generated in building the
>> project, when we run build and tar source code. If you think we should not
>> include it, I think we can add an exclusion in next release.
>>
>> That would be a good idea.
>>
>> >
>> > Is that good enough for you?
>>
>> I think there is a problem with the build process, because the source
>> artifact contains other items that are not in Git.
>>
>> $ diff -r incubator-skywalking/
>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .git
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .github
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .gitignore
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .travis.yml
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto: .git
>> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent:
>> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>> Only in
>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
>> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>> Only in
>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
>> file:
>> Only in
>> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-toolkit-activation/apm-toolkit-log4j-1.x-activation:
>> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: docs
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .git
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .gitignore
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .travis.yml
>> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/skywalking-ui: etc
>> Only in incubator-skywalking/: tools
>>
>> In the above listing, incubator-skywalking is the git clone produced by:
>> $ git clone --depth 1
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking.git -b v5.0.0-alpha
>> $ cd incubator-skywalking
>> $ git submodule init
>> $ git submodule update
>> and apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha is the unpacked
>> version of apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha-src.tgz
>>
>> The files that are only in Git are generally OK.
>>
>> However there should not generally be any files in the source archive
>> that are not also 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rd round)

[John D. Ament]

>From reading through this, I think I understand the confusion faced.

Typically when we see a source release, its tied to a single git repo.
Generating the source release in this case involves a special type of git
checkout, which IMHO is just fine.

It just needs to be documented that when you clone the repo, it's using the
--recurse-submodules flag.  This should result in

Cloning into 'incubator-skywalking'...
remote: Counting objects: 114594, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (38/38), done.
remote: Total 114594 (delta 10), reused 29 (delta 2), pack-reused 114539
Receiving objects: 100% (114594/114594), 134.38 MiB | 4.55 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (44254/44254), done.
Submodule 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto' (
https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-data-collect-protocol.git)
registered for path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'
Submodule 'skywalking-ui' (https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking-ui)
registered for path 'skywalking-ui'
Cloning into
'/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto'...
remote: Counting objects: 52, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (44/44), done.
remote: Total 52 (delta 34), reused 10 (delta 8), pack-reused 0
Cloning into
'/Users/johnament/src/apache/incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui'...
remote: Counting objects: 4374, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (84/84), done.
remote: Total 4374 (delta 38), reused 51 (delta 17), pack-reused 4268

Receiving objects: 100% (4374/4374), 3.56 MiB | 6.15 MiB/s, done.
Resolving deltas: 100% (2107/2107), done.
Submodule path 'apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto': checked out
'c02c12af12116121e25155d1f3fca0fadee5f2e9'
Submodule path 'skywalking-ui': checked out
'922c012efd0c385e3c502d06d2730c73452f779d'


and then the checks that Sebb is trying should work.

Sheng, do you know if this checkout is documented somewhere?

John

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:49 AM sebb  wrote:

> On 1 April 2018 at 01:43, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:
> > Hi sebb,
> >
> >
> > I see your point, that is why we provide the build document[1] if you
> want to build from GitHub tag. Git submodules are used in our project for
> binding multi repos. The source codes tar is provided by running some
> source code release process, by following project document[2] and script
> [3].
>
> I see.
> So cloning the Git repo is not sufficient to get all the code (unless
> there is an option to automatically include submodules that I have
> missed).
>
> >
> > And for `dependency-reduced-pom.xml`, it is generated in building the
> project, when we run build and tar source code. If you think we should not
> include it, I think we can add an exclusion in next release.
>
> That would be a good idea.
>
> >
> > Is that good enough for you?
>
> I think there is a problem with the build process, because the source
> artifact contains other items that are not in Git.
>
> $ diff -r incubator-skywalking/
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .git
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .github
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .gitignore
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: .travis.yml
> Only in incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto: .git
> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent:
> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> Only in
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> Only in
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
> file:
> Only in
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-toolkit-activation/apm-toolkit-log4j-1.x-activation:
> dependency-reduced-pom.xml
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: docs
> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .git
> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .gitignore
> Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .travis.yml
> Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/skywalking-ui: etc
> Only in incubator-skywalking/: tools
>
> In the above listing, incubator-skywalking is the git clone produced by:
> $ git clone --depth 1
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking.git -b v5.0.0-alpha
> $ cd incubator-skywalking
> $ git submodule init
> $ git submodule update
> and apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha is the unpacked
> version of apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha-src.tgz
>
> The files that are only in Git are generally OK.
>
> However there should not generally be any files in the source archive
> that are not also in Git.
>
> Apart from the poms, there are two such directories:
>
> apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core/file:
> skywalking-ui/etc
>
> The latter is empty.
> However the former contains quite a few directories which look to be
> crud from the build process.
>
> >
> > [1]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.0.0-alpha/docs/en/How-to-build.md#build-from-github
> > [2]
> 

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[sebb]

On 1 April 2018 at 13:28, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> non-bundled Dependencies are irrelevant to the contents of NOTICE and 
>> LICENSE.
>
> Yep 100% agree.
>
>> Though of course the license does affect whether it is allowed to be a
>> dependency.
>
> Also agree.
>
>> NOTICE and LICENSE are only for bits that are bundled in the release 
>> artifact.
>
> Yep 100% in agreement.
>
>> The LICENSE file must reflect the license(s) for all the bundled bits.
>
> Yep - in this case it’s missing some stuff here but that’s minor.
>
>> The NOTICE file must include all required notices and nothing more.
>
> And in this case it includes more than is needed. Do you disagree?

I have not looked at the NOTICE file.
I was responding to your statement:

"if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs to be
in LICENSE not NOTICE."

As noted above, I don't think that is true.

>> Bundled 3rd party code *can* affect the NOTICE file.
>> That's why it is important to only include required notices.
>
> But usually doesn’t with MIT or BSD licenses as is the case here. In most 
> cases required notices are quite rare.

Indeed, but that does not make the statement true.

> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> 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 Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version5.0.0-alpha(3rd round)

[sebb]

On 1 April 2018 at 01:43, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:
> Hi sebb,
>
>
> I see your point, that is why we provide the build document[1] if you want to 
> build from GitHub tag. Git submodules are used in our project for binding 
> multi repos. The source codes tar is provided by running some source code 
> release process, by following project document[2] and script [3].

I see.
So cloning the Git repo is not sufficient to get all the code (unless
there is an option to automatically include submodules that I have
missed).

>
> And for `dependency-reduced-pom.xml`, it is generated in building the 
> project, when we run build and tar source code. If you think we should not 
> include it, I think we can add an exclusion in next release.

That would be a good idea.

>
> Is that good enough for you?

I think there is a problem with the build process, because the source
artifact contains other items that are not in Git.

$ diff -r incubator-skywalking/ apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha
Only in incubator-skywalking/: .git
Only in incubator-skywalking/: .github
Only in incubator-skywalking/: .gitignore
Only in incubator-skywalking/: .travis.yml
Only in incubator-skywalking/apm-protocol/apm-network/src/main/proto: .git
Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent:
dependency-reduced-pom.xml
Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
dependency-reduced-pom.xml
Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core:
file:
Only in 
apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/apm-sniffer/apm-toolkit-activation/apm-toolkit-log4j-1.x-activation:
dependency-reduced-pom.xml
Only in incubator-skywalking/: docs
Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .git
Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .gitignore
Only in incubator-skywalking/skywalking-ui: .travis.yml
Only in apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha/skywalking-ui: etc
Only in incubator-skywalking/: tools

In the above listing, incubator-skywalking is the git clone produced by:
$ git clone --depth 1
https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking.git -b v5.0.0-alpha
$ cd incubator-skywalking
$ git submodule init
$ git submodule update
and apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha is the unpacked
version of apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha-src.tgz

The files that are only in Git are generally OK.

However there should not generally be any files in the source archive
that are not also in Git.

Apart from the poms, there are two such directories:

apm-sniffer/apm-agent-core/file:
skywalking-ui/etc

The latter is empty.
However the former contains quite a few directories which look to be
crud from the build process.

>
> [1] 
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.0.0-alpha/docs/en/How-to-build.md#build-from-github
> [2] 
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.0.0-alpha/docs/en/How-to-release.md#build-and-sign-the-source-code-package
> [3] 
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/blob/v5.0.0-alpha/tools/releasing/create_source_release.sh
>
>
> --
> Sheng Wu
> Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- Original --
> From:  "sebb";
> Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 08:28 AM
> To:  "general";
>
> Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) 
> version5.0.0-alpha(3rd round)
>
>
>
> On 1 April 2018 at 00:53, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:
>>> Please include the SCM URL in the VOTE email, as the tag and commitId
>>> aren't much use without it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Sebb
>>
>>
>> The SCM url with tag is this : 
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-skywalking/tree/v5.0.0-alpha
>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> I see.
>
> However that does not actually have a tag with the name '5.0.0-alpha'
>
> Also, when I compare the contents of
> apache-skywalking-apm-incubating-5.0.0-alpha-src.tgz with the tag,
> there are several files in the source release that don't appear to
> have a counterpart in the Git repo.
>
> For example, apm-sniffer/apm-agent/dependency-reduced-pom.xml
>
> skywalking-ui/*
>
> That does not seem right
>
>>
>> --
>> Sheng Wu
>> Apache SkyWalking original creator and PPMC member
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -- Original --
>> From:  "sebb";
>> Date:  Sun, Apr 1, 2018 07:41 AM
>> To:  "general";
>>
>> Subject:  Re: [VOTE] Release Apache SkyWalking (incubating) version 
>> 5.0.0-alpha(3rd round)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 31 March 2018 at 05:07, 吴晟 Sheng Wu  wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> This is a call for vote to release Apache SkyWalking (Incubating) version 
>>> 5.0.0-alpha.
>>>
>>>
>>> The Apache SkyWalking community has tested, voted and approved the proposed
>>> release of Apache SkyWalking (Incubating) 5.0.0-alpha
>>>
>>>
>>> From last vote:
>>> 1. Separated the 

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> non-bundled Dependencies are irrelevant to the contents of NOTICE and LICENSE.

Yep 100% agree.

> Though of course the license does affect whether it is allowed to be a
> dependency.

Also agree.

> NOTICE and LICENSE are only for bits that are bundled in the release artifact.

Yep 100% in agreement.

> The LICENSE file must reflect the license(s) for all the bundled bits.

Yep - in this case it’s missing some stuff here but that’s minor.

> The NOTICE file must include all required notices and nothing more.

And in this case it includes more than is needed. Do you disagree?

> Bundled 3rd party code *can* affect the NOTICE file.
> That's why it is important to only include required notices.

But usually doesn’t with MIT or BSD licenses as is the case here. In most cases 
required notices are quite rare.

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

apache at bintray

[Jochen Theodorou]

Hi all,

I was pointed at https://bintray.com/apache. Is that an "official" 
bintray account for apache? Are projects publishing convenience 
artifacts on bintray supposed to use that?


bye Jochen

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

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[sebb]

On 1 April 2018 at 09:21, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Can you elaborate a bit ? I checked the NOTICE file and it looks good to me. 
>> It mentions the included dependencies like bootstrap.
>
> Dependancies should not be mentioned in NOTICE. if something is bundled then 
> it's license and copyright needs to be in LICENSE not NOTICE.

Huh?
AIUI:

non-bundled Dependencies are irrelevant to the contents of NOTICE and LICENSE.
Though of course the license does affect whether it is allowed to be a
dependency.

NOTICE and LICENSE are only for bits that are bundled in the release artifact.
The LICENSE file must reflect the license(s) for all the bundled bits.
The NOTICE file must include all required notices and nothing more.

Bundled 3rd party code *can* affect the NOTICE file.
That's why it is important to only include required notices.

> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> 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: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

[???? Sheng Wu]

Agree, Justin's -1 really helps and pushes SkyWalking to do right things in 
releasing.
Thanks a lot, even we delayed our release two times (2 weeks)


:) Thanks Justin.


Sheng Wu


 
---Original---
From: "Willem Jiang"
Date: Sun, Apr 1, 2018 16:17 PM
To: "general";
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors


Yeah, it's easy to vote +1, but vote -1 take lots of time to go through the
kits.

To be honestly, I learned a lot of License and Notice stuff thing from
Justin's -1 vote, I really appreciate that.


Willem Jiang

Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
  http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: willem

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 7:24 AM, Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > As for the metric -- I really think that using mentor turnout on release
> > voting threads will serve us well.
>
> My concern with using that as a metric is people will just vote +1 without
> doing a thorough check and we may end up with more releases with issues.
>
> Possibly a better metric is how many mentors voted something other than +1
> on a RC, most releases (other than very simple ones) go through a couple of
> RCs before coming to the IPMC.
>
> Another metric is which project releases get a -1 in the IPMC as those
> issue should of been caught by the projects mentors.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

[RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Abhishek Tiwari]

Hi all,

The vote for releasing Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 (incubating) is now closed.

With a total of 4 +1 binding votes and one -1 vote, the vote passes.

+1 votes:
* Olivier Lamy
* Matt Sicker
* Jean-Baptiste Onofré
* Romain Manni-Bucau

-1 vote:
* Justin Mclean

Thank you everyone for taking the time to review the release and providing
useful feedback. We will continue to incorporate the improvements with the
next release.

I will now proceed to publish the release and send ANNOUNCE.

Regards,
Abhishek

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 2:28 AM, Abhishek Tiwari  wrote:

> Thanks everyone for the feedback.
>
> Summarizing the thread: proposed changes to the NOTICE file is an
> improvement and thus we will consider it in the next release.
> At the moment, I will close the vote since we have run out of time and
> have the necessary votes.
>
> Thanks again,
> Abhishek
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 1:51 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
> wrote:
>
>> +1, not a blocker since it is more on nice to have helpers than needed
>> tools IMHO and legally it looks ok and it builds properly
>>
>> Le 1 avr. 2018 10:42, "Olivier Lamy"  a écrit :
>>
>> > Well not a big drama, we can fix that with the next release.
>> > ATM  2 mentors have voted +1: Jean-Baptiste and myself.
>> > 1 * IPMC with Matt.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 at 18:36, Justin Mclean 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > PS by my count you only need one more +1 vote and only one of your
>> > project
>> > > mentors have voted.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Justin
>> > > -
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Olivier Lamy
>> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Abhishek Tiwari]

Thanks everyone for the feedback.

Summarizing the thread: proposed changes to the NOTICE file is an
improvement and thus we will consider it in the next release.
At the moment, I will close the vote since we have run out of time and have
the necessary votes.

Thanks again,
Abhishek

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 1:51 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau 
wrote:

> +1, not a blocker since it is more on nice to have helpers than needed
> tools IMHO and legally it looks ok and it builds properly
>
> Le 1 avr. 2018 10:42, "Olivier Lamy"  a écrit :
>
> > Well not a big drama, we can fix that with the next release.
> > ATM  2 mentors have voted +1: Jean-Baptiste and myself.
> > 1 * IPMC with Matt.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 at 18:36, Justin Mclean 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > PS by my count you only need one more +1 vote and only one of your
> > project
> > > mentors have voted.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Justin
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Olivier Lamy
> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Romain Manni-Bucau]

+1, not a blocker since it is more on nice to have helpers than needed
tools IMHO and legally it looks ok and it builds properly

Le 1 avr. 2018 10:42, "Olivier Lamy"  a écrit :

> Well not a big drama, we can fix that with the next release.
> ATM  2 mentors have voted +1: Jean-Baptiste and myself.
> 1 * IPMC with Matt.
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 at 18:36, Justin Mclean 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > PS by my count you only need one more +1 vote and only one of your
> project
> > mentors have voted.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Olivier Lamy]

Well not a big drama, we can fix that with the next release.
ATM  2 mentors have voted +1: Jean-Baptiste and myself.
1 * IPMC with Matt.


On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 at 18:36, Justin Mclean  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> PS by my count you only need one more +1 vote and only one of your project
> mentors have voted.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

-- 
Olivier Lamy
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Thanks for the update. It makes sense.
Let's see what the other IPMC will say. Definitely something to fix for next 
release at least.

Regards
JB

Le 1 avr. 2018 à 10:25, à 10:25, Justin Mclean  a 
écrit:
>Hi,
>
>> Yes but as said we can fix in next release cycle. It's more an
>improvement than a blocker IMHO.
>
>IMO it still warrants a -1, but that is not a veto or a blocker. Other
>IPMC members and the project mentors are free to vote however they
>want. If you get 3 +1 votes and more +1’s than -1’s you can release it.
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
>-
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

PS by my count you only need one more +1 vote and only one of your project 
mentors have voted.

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

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Yes but as said we can fix in next release cycle. It's more an improvement 
> than a blocker IMHO.

IMO it still warrants a -1, but that is not a veto or a blocker. Other IPMC 
members and the project mentors are free to vote however they want. If you get 
3 +1 votes and more +1’s than -1’s you can release it.

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

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Can you elaborate a bit ? I checked the NOTICE file and it looks good to me. 
> It mentions the included dependencies like bootstrap.

Dependancies should not be mentioned in NOTICE. if something is bundled then 
it's license and copyright needs to be in LICENSE not NOTICE.

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

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Can you please explain what is the legal problem with such content?

It’s not a legal probably as such but an ASF policy one. The NOTICE need to be 
keep as small as possible as it has an affect on downstream projects.

> TBH I can see so many similar content in a lot of TLP projects. 

You might think you do but you may be confusing relocated copyrights with 
copyrights from license files or content from upstream notice files.

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

Re: [DISCUSS] Absent mentors

[Willem Jiang]

Yeah, it's easy to vote +1, but vote -1 take lots of time to go through the
kits.

To be honestly, I learned a lot of License and Notice stuff thing from
Justin's -1 vote, I really appreciate that.


Willem Jiang

Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
  http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 7:24 AM, Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > As for the metric -- I really think that using mentor turnout on release
> > voting threads will serve us well.
>
> My concern with using that as a metric is people will just vote +1 without
> doing a thorough check and we may end up with more releases with issues.
>
> Possibly a better metric is how many mentors voted something other than +1
> on a RC, most releases (other than very simple ones) go through a couple of
> RCs before coming to the IPMC.
>
> Another metric is which project releases get a -1 in the IPMC as those
> issue should of been caught by the projects mentors.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Jean-Baptiste Onofré]

Yes but as said we can fix in next release cycle. It's more an improvement than 
a blocker IMHO.

Regards
JB

Le 1 avr. 2018 à 10:10, à 10:10, Willem Jiang  a écrit:
>Hi Olivier
>
>NOTICE file is not supposed to include the copyright unless the License
>requires.
>As the MIT License already has the copyright statement, we don't need
>to
>specify it in the NOTCE file.
>
>I just copy the Justin's comments from the lega issue discussion[1] ,
>it
>can explain lots of thing.
>
>"While including all of NOTICE is the safest/simplest way.
>
>INAL but I also think removal of obvious things that have been
>documented
>that shouldn't be there is also safe. i.e.
>
>  - Don't include ASF duplicate ASF copyright/this product developed at
>   the ASF lines [1]
>- Remove anything that should be in LICENSE (that is already there)
>i.e.
>   MIT and BSD license information [2]
>   - Remove any copyright lines from MIT and BSD (but not ASL 2.0)
>permissive licenses, who headers are still in place in their respective
>   files [3]
>   - Only include parts if they are bundled in your release [4]
>
>Perhaps also politely ask / provide a patch to the upstream project to
>fix
>their NOTICE file?
>
>1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product
>2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps
>3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
>4. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#guiding-principle;
>
>[1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-262
>
>
>Willem Jiang
>
>Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
>  http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
>Twitter: willemjiang
>Weibo: 姜宁willem
>
>On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Olivier Lamy  wrote:
>
>> Hi
>> the content is simply.
>> "
>>
>> Apache Gobblin
>>
>> Copyright 2017-2018 The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>>
>> This product includes software developed at
>>
>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>
>>
>> This product includes Bootstrap
>>
>> Copyright (c) 2011-2015 Twitter, Inc.
>>
>>
>> This product includes the Glyphicons Halflings icon set
>>
>> Copyright (c) Jan Kovařík (http://glyphicons.com)
>>
>> Licensed under The MIT License (MIT) as a part of the Bootstrap
>project.
>>
>>
>> This product includes normalize.css
>>
>> Copyright (c) Nicolas Gallagher and Jonathan Neal
>> "
>> Can you please explain what is the legal problem with such content?
>> TBH I can see so many similar content in a lot of TLP projects. So
>why we
>> should be more rude here than for other projects?
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 at 09:08, Justin Mclean 
>wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > -1 binding as NOTICE should not contain copyrights of bundled 3rd
>party
>> > software. The NOTICE file needs to only contain what is required
>(and
>> not
>> > already in LICENSE) and needs to be as small as possible as it
>affects
>> > downstream projects. [2]
>> >
>> > I checked:
>> > - incubating in name
>> > - signatures and hashes good
>> > - DISCLAIMER exists
>> > - LICENSE is missing info for fonts [1]
>> > - NOTICE is incorrect
>> > - Some .sh files are missing ASF headers
>> > - Can compile from source
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Justin
>> >
>> > 1.
>> > apache-gobblin-incubating-sources-0.12.0/gobblin-admin/
>> src/main/resources/static/fonts/*
>> > 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>-
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Olivier Lamy
>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>>

Re: [VOTE] Apache Gobblin 0.12.0 release RC2

[Willem Jiang]

Hi Olivier

NOTICE file is not supposed to include the copyright unless the License
requires.
As the MIT License already has the copyright statement, we don't need to
specify it in the NOTCE file.

I just copy the Justin's comments from the lega issue discussion[1] , it
can explain lots of thing.

"While including all of NOTICE is the safest/simplest way.

INAL but I also think removal of obvious things that have been documented
that shouldn't be there is also safe. i.e.

   - Don't include ASF duplicate ASF copyright/this product developed at
   the ASF lines [1]
   - Remove anything that should be in LICENSE (that is already there) i.e.
   MIT and BSD license information [2]
   - Remove any copyright lines from MIT and BSD (but not ASL 2.0)
   permissive licenses, who headers are still in place in their respective
   files [3]
   - Only include parts if they are bundled in your release [4]

Perhaps also politely ask / provide a patch to the upstream project to fix
their NOTICE file?

1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product
2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps
3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
4. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#guiding-principle;

[1]https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-262


Willem Jiang

Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
  http://jnn.iteye.com  (Chinese)
Twitter: willemjiang
Weibo: 姜宁willem

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 8:38 AM, Olivier Lamy  wrote:

> Hi
> the content is simply.
> "
>
> Apache Gobblin
>
> Copyright 2017-2018 The Apache Software Foundation
>
>
> This product includes software developed at
>
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>
>
> This product includes Bootstrap
>
> Copyright (c) 2011-2015 Twitter, Inc.
>
>
> This product includes the Glyphicons Halflings icon set
>
> Copyright (c) Jan Kovařík (http://glyphicons.com)
>
> Licensed under The MIT License (MIT) as a part of the Bootstrap project.
>
>
> This product includes normalize.css
>
> Copyright (c) Nicolas Gallagher and Jonathan Neal
> "
> Can you please explain what is the legal problem with such content?
> TBH I can see so many similar content in a lot of TLP projects. So why we
> should be more rude here than for other projects?
>
>
> On Sun, 1 Apr 2018 at 09:08, Justin Mclean  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > -1 binding as NOTICE should not contain copyrights of bundled 3rd party
> > software. The NOTICE file needs to only contain what is required  (and
> not
> > already in LICENSE) and needs to be as small as possible as it affects
> > downstream projects. [2]
> >
> > I checked:
> > - incubating in name
> > - signatures and hashes good
> > - DISCLAIMER exists
> > - LICENSE is missing info for fonts [1]
> > - NOTICE is incorrect
> > - Some .sh files are missing ASF headers
> > - Can compile from source
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> >
> > 1.
> > apache-gobblin-incubating-sources-0.12.0/gobblin-admin/
> src/main/resources/static/fonts/*
> > 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>