Hi Justin,
Thanks for your reminder,
About "how contributions to the project are licensed",I found some
useful information:
According to py4j CONTRIBUTING.rst[1]:
"Py4J does not have an official Contributor License Agreement (CLA),
but it is assumed that as soon as you make a contribution (patc
Hi,
> But the py file is still missing license headers and have different
> authors[2]. We don't know how to solve this problem.
You may need to look at the history f the files to see if that provide some
clues or how contributions to the project are licensed. You could also contact
the project
Hi Justin
We found that the new version of py4j has removed the backport.py file, so
after our evaluation, we upgraded the py4j version to
py4j-0.10.7-src.zip[1].
But the py file is still missing license headers and have different
authors[2]. We don't know how to solve this problem.
[1] https://
Hi Justin
I also find that other projects also have this issue such as spark[1] ,
flink[2] and so on.
Is it necessary to start a new thread email to discuss this?
Looking forward to your further reply.
[1]
https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/python/lib/py4j-0.10.9.5-src.zip
[2]
https://g
Hi,
>> I confirmed in the py4j-0.10.7-src.zip file, and the backport.py file
>> clearly states that it is all licensed under the PSF License.
>>
>> So can it be considered that py4j-0.10.7-src.zip is licensed under
>> BDS license, except that backport.py is under PSF license
I would double check
>
> Hi Justin
>
> I confirmed in the py4j-0.10.7-src.zip file, and the backport.py file
> clearly states that it is all licensed under the PSF License.
>
> So can it be considered that py4j-0.10.7-src.zip is licensed under
> BDS license, except that backport.py is under PSF license
>
> In this c
Hi,
> 2. LICENSE is missing license from files in this zip It’s looks like
> they are under the PSF License not the BSD license.
> The license of the file py4j-0.10.7-src.zip does specify the BSD
> license on their official website [1]
> We specify py4j-0.10.7-src.zip in the LICENSE file under BSD
Hi Justin
Thanks for the checking and guidances. I'd cancel this vote here, will
re-initiate a vote after solved the problems you indicated.
Thanks again for helping Linkis become a better, more Apache Way compliant
project :)
Regarding the issue you mentioned, we will make the following improvem
Hi,
Sorry but it’s -1 binding from me as there a binary in the source release.
There’s also a minor license issue.
I also notice you have 5 mentors, have you asked them to check the release?
It also looks like to me that the binary license and notice file are listing
all dependancies rather th
+1 binding
I checked:
- signed by IPMC member;
- LICENSE and NOTICE are presented;
- SHA512 is good;
- compile is successful with JDK8 and Maven 3.6.3 in my local;
While there is a small suggestion: a guide about how to compile the source
package is needed on the "Download" page. I get that on th
Dear IPMC,
We still need two more votes from IPMC members for this new release.
Please kindly help to review and vote, thanks you very much!
Peace wong
Best Regards.
cas...@apache.org 于2022年5月12日周四 19:58写道：
> Copy my +1 from dev@linkis (non-binding)
>
> Best Regards!
>
> Chen Xia
>
>
> peacewo
Copy my +1 from dev@linkis (non-binding)
Best Regards!
Chen Xia
peacewong 于2022年5月11日周三 15:13写道：
> Hello Incubator Community,
>
> This is a call for a vote to release Apache Linkis(Incubating) version
> 1.1.1-RC1
>
> The Apache Linkis community has voted on and approved a proposal to
Hello Incubator Community,
This is a call for a vote to release Apache Linkis(Incubating) version
1.1.1-RC1
The Apache Linkis community has voted on and approved a proposal to release
Apache Linkis(Incubating) version 1.1.1-RC1
We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members rev
13 matches
Mail list logo
