Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1
After thinking about it some more I really believe strongly that our developers should have an easy time adding more integration tests. It's really critical to our project in the longer term. Manually editing XML files to copy/paste an ASF header in there can not be part of that experience. It's simply out of the question. I don't see the same requirement for other Apache projects that have .avro or .parquet files as part of their test-suites. The obvious reason being that folks are not really opening up these file formats with a text editor... just like we never do this with .hpl/.hwf files. So we're just being punished for having chosen an XML format. Since we've exhausted all other possibilities I'll start the discussion on dev to move to a different file format for our metadata. All the best, Matt On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 2:09 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > I'm a little confused, and I may be missing some context here. If the work > a part of an ASF project, why do you need to include a copyright statements > anywhere? If the code is not part of the project then we do need to know > the license and copyright owner. While this might be a good place to > include it, it would still also need to go in the LICENSE file, so that a > duplication of work and something that could easily get out of sync. > > IMO (and there may be there ways of dealing with this) just get the > contributors to sign ICLAs so there no issue with their contributions and > there’s no issues with the contents of the LICENSE file or indeed licensing. > > Kind Regards, > Justin -- Neo4j Chief Solutions Architect *✉ *matt.cast...@neo4j.com ☎ +32486972937
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1
Hi, What Matt was pointing at is to include a (or , but let's forget about that for now) element in the XML documents that the hpl and hwf files are. We could do this by including an option in Hop Gui (our visual IDE that generates the hpl and hwf files) to include the ASF header for the integration test and sample hpl and hwf files. Outside of our code repository, users could use that functionality to include their own header or copyright to the hpl and hwf files they create. Those files would never end up in our repository, so that is out of scope for this discussion. Regards, Bart On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 2:09 PM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > I'm a little confused, and I may be missing some context here. If the work > a part of an ASF project, why do you need to include a copyright statements > anywhere? If the code is not part of the project then we do need to know > the license and copyright owner. While this might be a good place to > include it, it would still also need to go in the LICENSE file, so that a > duplication of work and something that could easily get out of sync. > > IMO (and there may be there ways of dealing with this) just get the > contributors to sign ICLAs so there no issue with their contributions and > there’s no issues with the contents of the LICENSE file or indeed licensing. > > Kind Regards, > Justin > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1
Hi, I'm a little confused, and I may be missing some context here. If the work a part of an ASF project, why do you need to include a copyright statements anywhere? If the code is not part of the project then we do need to know the license and copyright owner. While this might be a good place to include it, it would still also need to go in the LICENSE file, so that a duplication of work and something that could easily get out of sync. IMO (and there may be there ways of dealing with this) just get the contributors to sign ICLAs so there no issue with their contributions and there’s no issues with the contents of the LICENSE file or indeed licensing. Kind Regards, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Weex project is retired
On Mon, 7 Jun 2021 at 10:31, Willem Jiang wrote: > > Now the Infra options about the Weex retirement are all done. > Please check out this issue[1] for more information. > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21917 However the weex LDAP project still exists [2]; it seems that step was omitted from the JIRA issue. [2] https://whimsy.apache.org/roster/other/ > Willem Jiang > > Twitter: willemjiang > Weibo: 姜宁willem > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
[VOTE] Release Apache Pegasus (Incubating) 2.2.0-RC0
Hi, all This is a call for a vote to release Apache Pegasus (Incubating) version 2.2.0-RC0. Pegasus is a distributed key-value storage system that is designed to be simple, horizontally scalable, strongly consistent, and high-performance. The Apache Pegasus community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache Pegasus 2.2.0-RC0. Apache Pegasus community vote thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r5f045c9f82e67c01bc23504b66960fb07afdd72875b8e1c808a05e31%40%3Cdev.pegasus.apache.org%3EVote Result thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r89ca7e3caf0790c9244480db6a105611b00732dd81b9da934b1fbc82%40%3Cdev.pegasus.apache.org%3E The source tarball, including signatures, digests, etc. can be found at: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pegasus/2.2.0-RC0/ It is tagged in Git as v2.2.0-RC0 and the corresponding hash is the following: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-pegasus.git;a=commit;h=a81b6c78cca29d679ae51d7cf5287334c914e3dd KEYS file available: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pegasus/KEYS For information about the contents of this release, see: https://docs.google.com/document/d/167M4R063FYcMXOahaInxkjJ8MBYBpzQ1ijeh0qC9SrE/edit?usp=sharing The vote will be open for 72 hours. [ ] +1 approve [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason Best regards, Yingchun Lai
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1
Let's set the past aside for a moment. The last thing I want is to make this in any way personal. I have nothing but appreciation for everything you've all done for our project. So what this comes down to is that we need to engineer our way out of the fact that Hop pipeline and workflow files (.hpl/.hwf) are both user and developer generated. We also have plans to move from XML to JSON (or other file formats) in the (near) future. I don't disagree with Justin on the fact that we want to express that the unit test files are part of an ASF body of work. There is the added problem of the fact that these very users and developers almost never look at the file content in XML format hiding the ASF header for all intents and purposes. So here is a proposal: would it be OK to add an extra "" or "" field in the contents of the XML (and later JSON, ...)? That way we can add a feature in the GUI to allow users to actually see and modify the ASF header content and it would also work for the other file formats we have in mind. Adding a feature to set the default ASF in the GUI would also be quite easy. This would then move from a problem to a worthy feature addition since this way Hop users can add their own copyright header to the pipeline and workflow files they create if they feel like they need to. Cheers, Matt On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 2:02 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > Well Justin, these files are typically generated by our software. It > would > > not be OK to force the license into all files since that wouldn't be > > appropriate and right since we don't force Apache copyright on the work > of > > others. > > The ASF header doesn’t include a copyright line and the ALv2 license > doesn’t ask to transfer copyright so I’m not sure what you mean by the > above. If those files are in an ASF repo they they need to be (in general) > covered by a software grant, ICLA, CCLA etc or be 3rd party file with a > compatible license. What you say above suggests they are actually 3rd party > files, the work of others outside the project? If they are 3rd party files > then that should be made clear. [2] > > > Without that possibility we're down to manually editing the files > > every time they are created or modified in the slightest. I don't see > that > > as a valid option. > > I would assume whatever generates them can generate them with a header? > Are all of these files generated or not? > > > That evaluation was made before. Now it just feels like one more rule we > > have to deal with that just comes out of the blue. > > Can you please point me to this conversation on your mailing list as I was > unable to find it. I did find this [1] > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rdb61e0df4ac921dc3af3e71b7971a20e9222016d9c02244bccfb3892%40%3Cdev.hop.apache.org%3E > 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1
Hi, > That specific unit test can be found here [1] Thanks for that. I assume the other files there [1] were moved and their headers changed? Kind Regards, Justin 1. https://github.com/pentaho/pdi-dataservice-plugin/tree/master/pdi-dataservice-client/src/test/java/org/pentaho/di/core/sql - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1
Hi, That specific unit test can be found here [1], but we will strip out everything to move forward. Kind regards, Hans [1] https://github.com/pentaho/pdi-dataservice-plugin/blob/master/pdi-dataservice-client/src/test/java/org/pentaho/di/core/sql/SQLFieldsUnitTest.java On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 11:03, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the information. > > > There are more files that have altered headers (though all with apache > 2.0 > > license) and are adapted from the following repository [1], > > That is unfortunate, both in changing the headers and that code doesn't > have a clear license. 3rd party headers, even if they are Apache licensed > should not be altered and without a clear license that code should have > never been put into a release. > > Also From a quick glance I cannot see the code I noticed in the release in > there. I could have missed it, or is it from another repository? > > > If we were to list product and version it would point to the same > > product/version covered by our initial import. It has no separate > > LICENSE/NOTICE file as it was never released standalone. > > One way to deal with this would be to donate that code via a software > grant. > > > We could have a discussion to add the header to the code that > > generates these files but my opinion is that it would clutter the files > for > > our users and bloat the format. > > > I suggest you have that discussion. Files can get separated from their > releases, and if they have no header saying what license they are under it > can make things difficult. There are only few exceptions to this ASF policy > [1] > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1
Hi, Thanks for the information. > There are more files that have altered headers (though all with apache 2.0 > license) and are adapted from the following repository [1], That is unfortunate, both in changing the headers and that code doesn't have a clear license. 3rd party headers, even if they are Apache licensed should not be altered and without a clear license that code should have never been put into a release. Also From a quick glance I cannot see the code I noticed in the release in there. I could have missed it, or is it from another repository? > If we were to list product and version it would point to the same > product/version covered by our initial import. It has no separate > LICENSE/NOTICE file as it was never released standalone. One way to deal with this would be to donate that code via a software grant. > We could have a discussion to add the header to the code that > generates these files but my opinion is that it would clutter the files for > our users and bloat the format. I suggest you have that discussion. Files can get separated from their releases, and if they have no header saying what license they are under it can make things difficult. There are only few exceptions to this ASF policy [1] Thanks, Justin 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Hop (incubating) 0.99-rc1
Hi Justin, There are more files that have altered headers (though all with apache 2.0 license) and are adapted from the following repository [1], bits and pieces were used and adapted to our needs, this repository is a module that was bundled with the original source we started from it has no separate release and versions though it was not in our initial code import we assumed it was covered. If we were to list product and version it would point to the same product/version covered by our initial import. It has no separate LICENSE/NOTICE file as it was never released standalone. For the hpl/hwf files, we could add a script to include the header in the files added to our repository. These files are not man-made but generated by our application. Compared to OpenOffice for example, these are our ".odf" files. We could have a discussion to add the header to the code that generates these files but my opinion is that it would clutter the files for our users and bloat the format. Kind regards, Hans [1] https://github.com/pentaho/pdi-dataservice-plugin On Sat, 12 Jun 2021 at 02:23, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi,’ > > Perhaps this will help: A software grant / initial donation consists of a > set of files, their 3rd party headers will be replaced with ASF ones and > that noted in the NOTICE file. If any other files 3rd party files, were > then copied into the same ASF repo they should retain their original 3rd > party header and their details mention in LICENSE. This may also requires > some changes to NOTICE but these would be different to changed needed from > the initial donation. > > Thanks, > Justin > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate Apache Pinot (Incubating) as a TLP
Hi, Thanks for putting that information together, everything look goods, but I have a couple of queries. From your PMC I noticed one person Jackie Jiang has not sign up to the private list and has not sent a single mail to the dev or private lists. Have you asked them if they want to be on the PMC? It might also be a good idea to discuss adding some of your existing committers to the new PMC as well. They can be added in teh normal way after graduation as well. I also noticed there one person who perhaps should not be subscribed to your private list (Jihao Zhang). I also notice that you have links on the front page to seem to point to non-ASF software? Presto and ThirdEye. ThirdEye from memory is not compatible with the Apache license so I’m not sure that the project should be promoting this on their front page and where they are include big disclaimers warning people about this. Is this documentation still correct, [6] I notice this no longer works [7] The Presto documentation looks to have a few branding issue that need to be corrected [3]. Is the PPMC aware of this and doing something about it? I can see some other branding issues with the presto webpage [4][5] (and other pages) and Apache projects with Pinot and Hive, Hadoop, Cassandra, Spark, Kafka and Druid. There might be others. Has this license issue been fixed? [1] I can see the issue is still open [2] Thanks, Justin 1. https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rb2bc93448636e3238f72654426ecce232b46c73ed1447b9c47a1d49e%40%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E 2. https://github.com/apache/incubator-pinot/issues/6785 3. https://prestodb.io/docs/current/connector/pinot.html 4. https://prestodb.io 5. https://prestodb.io/faq.html 6. https://docs.pinot.apache.org/integrations/thirdeye 7. https://github.com/apache/incubator-pinot/tree/master/thirdeye - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
