Canceling due to some license issues in this RC.
-Taylor
> On Mar 22, 2019, at 4:23 PM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote:
>
> This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 2.0.0 (rc5)
>
> Full list of changes in this release:
>
>
Thanks.
Den tir. 9. apr. 2019 kl. 19.21 skrev P. Taylor Goetz :
> Cool. I’ll put one together tomorrow.
>
> -Taylor
>
> > On Apr 9, 2019, at 1:00 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing
> wrote:
> >
> > Merged the PR. I think we follow the ASF guidelines more closely now.
> >
> > I probably won't backport it to
Cool. I’ll put one together tomorrow.
-Taylor
> On Apr 9, 2019, at 1:00 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing wrote:
>
> Merged the PR. I think we follow the ASF guidelines more closely now.
>
> I probably won't backport it to 1.x, and I'm not sure it's necessary. After
> looking at a few other Apache
Merged the PR. I think we follow the ASF guidelines more closely now.
I probably won't backport it to 1.x, and I'm not sure it's necessary. After
looking at a few other Apache projects, it looks like it's pretty variable
how detailed the included license information is. If someone feels that it
See the first few responses in this thread, as well as this comment
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2980#issuecomment-480514979, I tried
to point to the relevant ASF guidelines there. We are missing a bit of text
in NOTICE, we aren't including enough in LICENSE for the binary releases,
and we
?
On Wednesday, March 27, 2019, 4:39:33 PM PDT, Roshan Naik
wrote:
Will there be another RC or this one is good to continue with ?
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Wednesday, March 27, 2019, 9:41 AM, Derek Dagit wrote:
* Downloaded source ZIP, `mvn clean install`, all passed
I think this RC is dead due to potential license issues. If someone gets a
chance, please take a look at https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2980.
Den tor. 28. mar. 2019 kl. 00.39 skrev Roshan Naik
:
> Will there be another RC or this one is good to continue with ?
>
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail
Will there be another RC or this one is good to continue with ?
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Wednesday, March 27, 2019, 9:41 AM, Derek Dagit wrote:
* Downloaded source ZIP, `mvn clean install`, all passed
* Verified signatures and checksums
* Packaged my build and ran a single-tenant
* Downloaded source ZIP, `mvn clean install`, all passed
* Verified signatures and checksums
* Packaged my build and ran a single-tenant (default) cluster
* Ran org.apache.storm.starter.WordCountTopology
* UI seemed OK, Visualization seemed OK, Logviewer seemed OK
+1
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 3:23
Thanks for clarifying Taylor.
If I understand it correctly, the L & N for source should only contain
licenses for source we include. So the L & N files we have now are probably
fine for this, as they contain licensing for the Javascript we have in UI,
and I don't believe we include other kinds of
L & N files usually differ between source and binary distributions. Usually due
to shading, contents of lib directory, etc. Source distributions are simpler,
since they can’t contain any binaries. For a binary distribution, the L & N
files need to reflect everything in the binary dependencies.
Maybe something like this? https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2980
Den man. 25. mar. 2019 kl. 14.12 skrev Stig Rohde Døssing <
stigdoess...@gmail.com>:
> The ASF guideline says the file "should identify the third-party product,
> its licensing, and a url to the its homepage". If we can get
The ASF guideline says the file "should identify the third-party product,
its licensing, and a url to the its homepage". If we can get away with
including the license name and not the license text, I think
THIRD-PARTY.txt contains what we need. E.g. Spark also only lists the
license names, and not
According to how other projects are doing right now, looks like we are not
doing.
https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/NOTICE-binary
https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/LICENSE-binary
https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/trunk/LICENSE
If I understand correct, aether in
0
Built and ran tests from source zip.
Ran ExclamationTopology on local install set up from binary zip.
Verified no unexpected error logs.
Ran integration test locally.
Clicked around in UI for a bit, checked that logviewer works.
Ran the license check plugin, and verified that all dependency
This is a call to vote on releasing Apache Storm 2.0.0 (rc5)
Full list of changes in this release:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/storm/apache-storm-2.0.0-rc5/RELEASE_NOTES.html
The tag/commit to be voted upon is v2.0.0:
16 matches
Mail list logo
