Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
Hi sebb, What specifically needs to be done to correct the NOTICE file? Should the references to Nathan Marz and Yahoo! be removed? Thanks, Taylor On Feb 14, 2014, at 12:44 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: If the code has not changed substantially in 2014 then the date can stay as 2013. As to the attribution, that depends on the _exact text_ of the license provided with the files. The license(s) should also be included in the LICENSE file. Note that attributions in the NOTICE file must be passed to downstream consumers so it is important not to include anything that is not required. On 14 February 2014 17:31, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote: +1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks, Apache Storm Team - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- http://hortonworks.com/download/ -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You. - To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
On 15 February 2014 16:44, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi sebb, What specifically needs to be done to correct the NOTICE file? Should the references to Nathan Marz and Yahoo! be removed? As I already wrote, this depends on the exact license(s) of the file(s) involved. Thanks, Taylor On Feb 14, 2014, at 12:44 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: If the code has not changed substantially in 2014 then the date can stay as 2013. As to the attribution, that depends on the _exact text_ of the license provided with the files. The license(s) should also be included in the LICENSE file. Note that attributions in the NOTICE file must be passed to downstream consumers so it is important not to include anything that is not required. On 14 February 2014 17:31, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote: +1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks, Apache Storm Team - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- http://hortonworks.com/download/ -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
With the exception of some JavaScript code [1], all source code files use the Apache v2 license. Prior to entering the incubator, the project used the Eclipse Public License. In the incubator, all source files that did not have a license header already (the JavaScript files mentioned above), were updated with the Apache v2 license header. So from a LICENSE/NOTICE file perspective, where does that put us? -Taylor On Feb 15, 2014, at 12:10 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 February 2014 16:44, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi sebb, What specifically needs to be done to correct the NOTICE file? Should the references to Nathan Marz and Yahoo! be removed? As I already wrote, this depends on the exact license(s) of the file(s) involved. Thanks, Taylor On Feb 14, 2014, at 12:44 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: If the code has not changed substantially in 2014 then the date can stay as 2013. As to the attribution, that depends on the _exact text_ of the license provided with the files. The license(s) should also be included in the LICENSE file. Note that attributions in the NOTICE file must be passed to downstream consumers so it is important not to include anything that is not required. On 14 February 2014 17:31, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote: +1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks, Apache Storm Team - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- http://hortonworks.com/download/ -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
It means that unless Nathan Marz and an Yahoo! employee added those items to the NOTICE, you can remove them. But if they did, than either Nathan Marz or a Y! employee should be asked to. In terms of being a release blocker, I’d say not. If you fix this in HEAD that should be sufficient to continue. On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:02 PM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: With the exception of some JavaScript code [1], all source code files use the Apache v2 license. Prior to entering the incubator, the project used the Eclipse Public License. In the incubator, all source files that did not have a license header already (the JavaScript files mentioned above), were updated with the Apache v2 license header. So from a LICENSE/NOTICE file perspective, where does that put us? -Taylor On Feb 15, 2014, at 12:10 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 February 2014 16:44, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi sebb, What specifically needs to be done to correct the NOTICE file? Should the references to Nathan Marz and Yahoo! be removed? As I already wrote, this depends on the exact license(s) of the file(s) involved. Thanks, Taylor On Feb 14, 2014, at 12:44 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: If the code has not changed substantially in 2014 then the date can stay as 2013. As to the attribution, that depends on the _exact text_ of the license provided with the files. The license(s) should also be included in the LICENSE file. Note that attributions in the NOTICE file must be passed to downstream consumers so it is important not to include anything that is not required. On 14 February 2014 17:31, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote: +1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
+1 (binding) On Feb 13, 2014, at 2:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because … Thanks, Apache Storm Team
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
Hi Joseph, Thank you very much for the clarification. After checking the history of the NOTICE file [1], it turns out that those entries were made by Nathan and a Yahoo! employee. (I thought I had added Nathan to the file, but after checking the history, realized I didn’t, so there is a commit rollback in the history). I have reached out to both of them with a request to remove those entries. I’m assuming we can continue with the vote without having to start over at this point? Thanks again for your input. - Taylor On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Joseph Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote: It means that unless Nathan Marz and an Yahoo! employee added those items to the NOTICE, you can remove them. But if they did, than either Nathan Marz or a Y! employee should be asked to. In terms of being a release blocker, I’d say not. If you fix this in HEAD that should be sufficient to continue. On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:02 PM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: With the exception of some JavaScript code [1], all source code files use the Apache v2 license. Prior to entering the incubator, the project used the Eclipse Public License. In the incubator, all source files that did not have a license header already (the JavaScript files mentioned above), were updated with the Apache v2 license header. So from a LICENSE/NOTICE file perspective, where does that put us? -Taylor On Feb 15, 2014, at 12:10 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 February 2014 16:44, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi sebb, What specifically needs to be done to correct the NOTICE file? Should the references to Nathan Marz and Yahoo! be removed? As I already wrote, this depends on the exact license(s) of the file(s) involved. Thanks, Taylor On Feb 14, 2014, at 12:44 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: If the code has not changed substantially in 2014 then the date can stay as 2013. As to the attribution, that depends on the _exact text_ of the license provided with the files. The license(s) should also be included in the LICENSE file. Note that attributions in the NOTICE file must be passed to downstream consumers so it is important not to include anything that is not required. On 14 February 2014 17:31, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote: +1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here:
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
I would say that is the right approach, and that this vote should continue on. On Feb 15, 2014, at 2:34 PM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Joseph, Thank you very much for the clarification. After checking the history of the NOTICE file [1], it turns out that those entries were made by Nathan and a Yahoo! employee. (I thought I had added Nathan to the file, but after checking the history, realized I didn’t, so there is a commit rollback in the history). I have reached out to both of them with a request to remove those entries. I’m assuming we can continue with the vote without having to start over at this point? Thanks again for your input. - Taylor On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Joseph Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote: It means that unless Nathan Marz and an Yahoo! employee added those items to the NOTICE, you can remove them. But if they did, than either Nathan Marz or a Y! employee should be asked to. In terms of being a release blocker, I’d say not. If you fix this in HEAD that should be sufficient to continue. On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:02 PM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: With the exception of some JavaScript code [1], all source code files use the Apache v2 license. Prior to entering the incubator, the project used the Eclipse Public License. In the incubator, all source files that did not have a license header already (the JavaScript files mentioned above), were updated with the Apache v2 license header. So from a LICENSE/NOTICE file perspective, where does that put us? -Taylor On Feb 15, 2014, at 12:10 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 February 2014 16:44, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi sebb, What specifically needs to be done to correct the NOTICE file? Should the references to Nathan Marz and Yahoo! be removed? As I already wrote, this depends on the exact license(s) of the file(s) involved. Thanks, Taylor On Feb 14, 2014, at 12:44 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: If the code has not changed substantially in 2014 then the date can stay as 2013. As to the attribution, that depends on the _exact text_ of the license provided with the files. The license(s) should also be included in the LICENSE file. Note that attributions in the NOTICE file must be passed to downstream consumers so it is important not to include anything that is not required. On 14 February 2014 17:31, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote: +1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
+1 (binding) On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 11:43 AM, Joseph Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.comwrote: I would say that is the right approach, and that this vote should continue on. On Feb 15, 2014, at 2:34 PM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Joseph, Thank you very much for the clarification. After checking the history of the NOTICE file [1], it turns out that those entries were made by Nathan and a Yahoo! employee. (I thought I had added Nathan to the file, but after checking the history, realized I didn’t, so there is a commit rollback in the history). I have reached out to both of them with a request to remove those entries. I’m assuming we can continue with the vote without having to start over at this point? Thanks again for your input. - Taylor On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Joseph Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote: It means that unless Nathan Marz and an Yahoo! employee added those items to the NOTICE, you can remove them. But if they did, than either Nathan Marz or a Y! employee should be asked to. In terms of being a release blocker, I’d say not. If you fix this in HEAD that should be sufficient to continue. On Feb 15, 2014, at 1:02 PM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: With the exception of some JavaScript code [1], all source code files use the Apache v2 license. Prior to entering the incubator, the project used the Eclipse Public License. In the incubator, all source files that did not have a license header already (the JavaScript files mentioned above), were updated with the Apache v2 license header. So from a LICENSE/NOTICE file perspective, where does that put us? -Taylor On Feb 15, 2014, at 12:10 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 February 2014 16:44, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Hi sebb, What specifically needs to be done to correct the NOTICE file? Should the references to Nathan Marz and Yahoo! be removed? As I already wrote, this depends on the exact license(s) of the file(s) involved. Thanks, Taylor On Feb 14, 2014, at 12:44 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: If the code has not changed substantially in 2014 then the date can stay as 2013. As to the attribution, that depends on the _exact text_ of the license provided with the files. The license(s) should also be included in the LICENSE file. Note that attributions in the NOTICE file must be passed to downstream consumers so it is important not to include anything that is not required. On 14 February 2014 17:31, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote: +1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
+1 -Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 2:00 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because … Thanks, Apache Storm Team signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
+1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks, Apache Storm Team - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- http://hortonworks.com/download/ -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You.
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
If the code has not changed substantially in 2014 then the date can stay as 2013. As to the attribution, that depends on the _exact text_ of the license provided with the files. The license(s) should also be included in the LICENSE file. Note that attributions in the NOTICE file must be passed to downstream consumers so it is important not to include anything that is not required. On 14 February 2014 17:31, Suresh Srinivas sur...@hortonworks.com wrote: +1 (binding) from me. Sebb, can you please answer the question related to the NOTICE file. I think while it may not be necessary to call out individual or companies contributing large portions of the code, it should not block this release and can be addressed later. On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 7:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I'm not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks, Apache Storm Team - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- http://hortonworks.com/download/ -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks, Apache Storm Team - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I’m not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks, Apache Storm Team - 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 using GPGMail
Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating
Correction: “has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license” should read “has now transitioned to the Apache v2 license”. On Feb 13, 2014, at 10:49 AM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the input! The majority of the codebase was originally developed by Nathan Marz, and it includes significant contributions from Yahoo!. The project was originally licensed under the Eclipse Public License, but has not transitioned to the Apache v2 license. If putting those attributions in the NOTICE file is not the correct thing to do, please let me know the right way to handle it. It was still 2013 when I last updated the NOTICE file. I’m not sure if that is a blocker for release or not. - Taylor On Feb 13, 2014, at 5:59 AM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote: On 13 February 2014 07:00, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote: This is a call for a vote to release Apache Storm (incubating) version 0.9.1. This will be the first release of Apache Storm. A vote was held on the developer mailing list, and passed with 9 +1 votes (6 binding, 3 non-binding), no 0 votes, and no -1 votes. Release Vote: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c44c5baad-0fd8-454c-84d7-c8da92442...@gmail.com%3e Release Vote Result: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-storm-dev/201402.mbox/%3c3a207f1c-3b07-4029-93d4-87abeb412...@gmail.com%3e The tag to be voted upon is v0.9.1-incubating: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=tree;h=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c;hb=ffc7a81bfba60c735dd6801af4f5e8db3812658c NOTICE file still refers to 2013. The NOTICE file also references software from Nathan Marz and Yahoo! However there are no corresponding licenses in the LICENSE file. Does the source *contain* software from either of the above? If so, where are the license files? If not, why are the attributions present in the NOTICE file? Remember that NL file entries are only for bits that are actually included in the distributiion. The specific source archive being voted upon can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3/apache-storm-0.9.1-incubating-src.tar.gz Other release files, signatures and digests can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-dist-rc3 The release artifacts are signed with the key available here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-storm.git;a=blob_plain;f=KEYS;hb=22b832708295fa2c15c4f3c70ac0d2bc6fded4bd The staging repository for this release can be found here: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachestorm-1002/ The generated reports and documentation for this release can be found here: http://people.apache.org/~ptgoetz/storm/storm-0.9.1-incubating-report-rc3 Please vote on releasing this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating. This vote will be open for at least 72 hours. [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache Storm 0.9.1-incubating [ ] 0 No opinion [ ] -1 Do not release this package because ... Thanks, Apache Storm Team - 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 using GPGMail
