Hi Dave (and everyone),
We just wanted to make it known here that we’ve merged a PR [1] to address this
issue, and bring forth a new release candidate as soon as possible.
Thanks for catching this, and sorry you had to… we previously thought we were
all clear after getting the license/attributi
+1
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 at 12:09, Felix Cheung wrote:
> It was discussed several times in private@pinot, we can take it from
> there.
>
> It will probably best if one of you simply edit that line right now in the
> git repo so we don’t get into this again in 0.7 release.
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 202
Hi Dave,
Thank you very much for the help and support. In MXNet we do use Apache Rat as
part of our CI, and it's run on every pull request [1]. When executing license
check, we excluded some file types (e.g. intermediate outputs from builds, lock
files, etc.), and some third-party modules that
Hi -
I went through the exercise, but I’m +0 as I really cannot handle reviewing the
license for 3000 files.
% java -jar ~/Development/apache-rat-0.13/apache-rat-0.13.jar -d . | more
*
Summary
---
Generated at: 2020-11-16T12:06:53-08:00
+1 (binding)
Checked signatures, hashes, incubating in name, NOTICE, LICENSE, and DISCLAIMER.
Compiled on macOS.
Ratcheck is OK.
Binary packages are as identical as possible. RPM is missing the BAT file as
expected. Did not check the MSI as I don’t have Windows.
> On Nov 4, 2020, at 8:30 AM,
> On Nov 16, 2020, at 11:24 AM, Maxime Beauchemin
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I thought we were ok around SIL. This was validated in previous releases as
> [from my understanding] we meet the conditions listed in
> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#weak-copyleft-licenses
You did flag them
HI -
+1 (binding)
All checks pass - signature, hash, incubating in name, LICENSE, NOTICE on both
repositories.
I recommend that you ask your Mentors how to use Apache Rat
(https://creadur.apache.org/rat/index.html) and add a .rat-excludes file. This
would make license checking much easier.
P
Hi,
I thought we were ok around SIL. This was validated in previous releases as
[from my understanding] we meet the conditions listed in
https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#weak-copyleft-licenses
> You should find another way to make use of these fonts.
Would loading the fonts from `npm` a
-1 (binding)
You are including Class B in your source release with these fonts.
https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#weak-copyleft-licenses
Third party SIL Open Font License v1.1 (OFL-1.1)
+1
On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 6:09 PM Felix Cheung wrote:
> It was discussed several times in private@pinot, we can take it from
> there.
>
> It will probably best if one of you simply edit that line right now in the
> git repo so we don’t get into this again in 0.7 release.
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11,
Kind reminder to the IPMC to vote on this release
Thank you!
On 2020/11/09 19:11:35, daniel gaspar wrote:
> Hello IPMC,
>
> The Apache Superset (incubating) community has voted on and approved a
> proposal to
> release Apache Superset (incubating) version 0.38.0.
> The voting thread can be fo
Still looking for 2 more votes. Reminder to please take a look if you
get a chance.
Thanks,
- Steve
On 11/10/20 7:51 AM, Steve Lawrence wrote:
> Remdiner to please take a look at this vote if you get a chance. We only have
> two mentors so we will need at least one vote from another IPMC member
Nice achievement, ECharts community!
Congrats.
Best,
---
Xiangdong Huang
Sheng Wu 于2020年11月14日周六 下午10:36写道：
> My support for the ECharts.
>
> I joined the mentor team a little late, and super excited that you have
> gotten all things resolved. Congrats!!
>
> Sh
13 matches
Mail list logo
