Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Hi, > If we all say fine.. let's just throw more paperwork at it, I would ask you > to help draft a line for the NOTICE of what we would do. suppose we would > also have to do this for gradle etc. You would need to do this for any 3rd party file bundled with a release and yes sometimes this is

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

Hi, > I have a quick question from a podling's perspective, should the > decision for release convenient binaries be left to PPMC or IPMC? If the binary are based on source that have been approve as an offical releases there are no issues, just take care to comply with branding and trademarks.

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

> But in the end ... if we actually do include code by takari isn't if fair > to mention it? > this is where I am trying to get at actually. is it an intention to change the NOTICE files After all it's not just the Java code the wrapper scripts themselves should > count too. > And in the end it's

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo OPS (Incubating) 0.1 [RC3]

Hi On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:18 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > An option would be to just release the source release if it gets 3 +1 votes. +1(non-binding) for to just the release the source without the binary distribution. According to the discussion in[1], I think the binary

[RESULT][VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo Spring Boot Project (Incubating) 2.7.0

Hi The release vote finished, We’ve received 3 (+1 binding) from Willem Jiang, Von Gosling and Justin Mclean 0 (-1 binding) 0 (+1 unbinding) The vote and result thread:

Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"?

Hi, On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:06 AM Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 6:59 AM Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 15, 2018, at 2:41 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I see this as a two-level thing: > > > > > > a) The source release is an Act

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Yeah well ... But in the end ... if we actually do include code by takari isn't if fair to mention it? After all it's not just the Java code the wrapper scripts themselves should count too. And in the end it's a one-time addition that will stick there for the rest of time. So give it 5 minutes

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Hi, > And exactly that file in the Edgent and PLC4X project are copies of my > original code (My PR wasn't accepted till then) > So IANAL, but if you copy the file from one of those, it should be ok ... > correct? It OK from either source as it’s ALv2 licensed but id it was from the 3rd party

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

> Does it help, that I wrote that file and submitted it in a pull request to > eliminate the binary jar needed prior to my change? ... Guess that's also > an additional reason why there's an Apache header on it :-) imho it helps in so far as the work itself (thanks!) and also a subject matter

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

And exactly that file in the Edgent and PLC4X project are copies of my original code (My PR wasn't accepted till then) So IANAL, but if you copy the file from one of those, it should be ok ... correct? It was code written by someone with a signed ICLA, committed to an Apache project. Chris

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

> > One of the tings I've noticed is that the vetos on a podling's first > > release can be a bit harsh. > > A -1 on a release is not a veto. A release can still pass if it gets 3 > +1 votes. However in this case because of the jar in a source release > it’s unlikely IMO to get 3 +1 IPMC

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

> > Did the Zipkin project file an SGA? If no, the contribution is all ICLA > based and you are correct. > If yes, then AFAIK Justin is correct, but there may be other edge cases. > There was no SGA. This particular codebase was also primarily authored by iCLA signers. In Zipkin, we did an odd

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Hi, > Takari is an Apache licensed codebase. My understanding is that there is a > requirement to include it in the NOTICE.txt file. You may wish to note that in LICENSE [1] But content will only go in NOTICE if it has it has it’s own NOTICE file. [1] > Furthermore, Takari contains no

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Please see my response in the other thread. I didn’t see this rethreading. Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 13, 2019, at 9:29 PM, Adrian Cole wrote: > > To help others participate, here is the original thread: >

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Does it help, that I wrote that file and submitted it in a pull request to eliminate the binary jar needed prior to my change? ... Guess that's also an additional reason why there's an Apache header on it :-) Outlook für Android herunterladen

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

> As binaries are not allowed in source repos, the maven wrapper > introduces a small java source file which bootstraps the tool. This > has Apache license headers on it. Takari is an Apache licensed codebase. My understanding is that there is a requirement to include it in the NOTICE.txt

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi Adrian/Justin, We are discussing the wrong points. The clear question is what is MavenWrapperDownloader.java and why does it need to be in source release? It doesn’t. The Zipkin build instruction should include the installation instructions for MavenWrapper. [3] Adrian will that work for

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo OPS (Incubating) 0.1 [RC3]

thanks, can I release the source release only in this version? and I can fix the binary release in the next version. thanks for @Willem Jiang to point out the binary license issue, can you please vote for the source release again？ On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 11:18 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi Adrian, Simple question inline. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 13, 2019, at 8:33 PM, Adrian Cole wrote: >> See [1][2] on policy and many many projects do it except those that were >> developed solely at the ASF. > In practice, you can find many, many that have stock files and were > not

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

To help others participate, here is the original thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8e9b5ec9b8fcc14427bee4dc64f4db7692b787e6349ed348b983d914@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E Here is the part about the file in question: > Should this file have an ASF header? [2] Where did it originally

Re: the case of the maven wrapper

Hi, > As a part of Zipkin's first attempt to vote a release on the general > list, Justin lightly dinged the maven wrapper file, asking for it to > be in the NOTICE box. I didn’t ask that all I asked was where the file was from. In general very list needs to go in NOTICE, this included: a)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi, > Again, this seems a site of unique enforcement with questionable > clarity as a result. You seem to want us to add a statement saying > that this code came from the Takari maven plugin and/or to investigate > their CLA process. Um no I want you to respect the license and headers of 3rd

Re: [DISCUSS] Guidelines for distribution of incubating artefacts on other platforms

Thanks for your effort get them documented. I'm a PPMC member of Apache SkyWalking and One of my major responsibilities is to distribute docker image. So this thread fairly help me. I have two questions here. First is about "Transition Period". When Apache official Dockerhub repository is created

the case of the maven wrapper

I suspect this has gone around in some incarnations, but I wanted to bring the topic to the front. One of the main problems solved in Gradle was environment consistency through "wrapper scripts". Wrappers lock the version of the tool and incidental dependencies in order to stabilize the build.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

> See [1][2] on policy and many many projects do it except those that were > developed solely at the ASF. In practice, you can find many, many that have stock files and were not developed solely at the ASF. Considering our statement was "The OpenZipkin Authors", I have not seen any file at all

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi, > I've not seen any example of a project noting prior headers like this, > so I winged a pull request. Feedback welcome! See [1][2] on policy and many many projects do it except those that were developed solely at the ASF. > similar to above, I've not found any apache project

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

> Re NOTICE did you project come to the ASF in 2016? Who did it come from, and > if the headers were changed to ASF ones then they should be mentioned in > NOTICE. I've not seen any example of a project noting prior headers like this, so I winged a pull request. Feedback welcome!

Re: [DISCUSS] Guidelines for distribution of incubating artefacts on other platforms

Hi, > I would like to see his guideline document posted somewhere on cwiki so it > doesn’t get lost in this thread. It is [1] if by cwiki you mean wiki.apache.org? > I would ultimately like both VP Legal and Infra to assess it, so that > everyone’s on the same page in terms of what’s

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Dubbo OPS (Incubating) 0.1 [RC3]

Hi, An option would be to just release the source release if it gets 3 +1 votes. +1 (binding) on source release For the source release I checked: - incubating in name - signatures and hashes file - DISCLAIMER exists - LICENSE and NOTICE good - No unexpected binary files - All source files have

Re: [DISCUSS] Guidelines for distribution of incubating artefacts on other platforms

> On Feb 12, 2019, at 11:36 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > >> Does this mean that we need a vote even for distribution of unreleased >> material ? > > You are not allowed to distribute unreleased material outside the developer >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache NetBeans parent pom 1

Hi, Sorry but it’s -1 binding as the artefacts do not have incubating in their name. [1] I checking - no incubating in name [1] It might also be a good idea to add apache in there as well. - signatures and hashed good - DISCLAIMER exits - LICENSE is OK - NOTICE has wrong year - No source code

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

> The product name is a problem. > > Please explain how this release relates to Apache Karaf? We can give you > branding guidance once you do. Sure thing. Zipkin is a tracing system and Brave is the original name of the tracing libary, and the most widely used one. We currently file "Brave" under

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Doris 0.9.0-incubating-rc02

Hi, +1 binding but LICENSE is missing a couple of licenses please fix in next release. Checked: - incubating in name - hashes and signatures good - LICENSE is missing some licenses (se below) - NOTICE is fine - No unexpected binaries in file - All ASF source files have ASF headers - On OSX so

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

The product name is a problem. Please explain how this release relates to Apache Karaf? We can give you branding guidance once you do. Regards, Dave Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 13, 2019, at 6:07 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) as it contains compiled code

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi, > As recutting, revoting, and reverifying is time consuming for the > volunteers I will wait for someone else to also look at this (besides our > mentors who already have) to save our folks the frustration of 3rd go round > leading to a 4th. That’s always a good idea any other IPMC have some

Re: [VOTE]: Release Apache Dubbo Spring Boot Project (Incubating) 2.7.0

Hi, +1 binding I checked: - incubating in name - signatures and hashes good - DISCLAIMER exits - LICENSE and NOTICE fine - No unexpected binary files - All source files have ASF headers - Can compile from source The jars in the convenience binary should probably include the DISCLAIMER as well

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

thanks justin. I missed this part about the jar and know there are options to it. the license warnings were already resolved for the next release. On the NOTICE, the headers originally said copyright "The OpenZipkin Authors" I can put that into a pull request prior to re-cutting. As recutting,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hi, Sorry but it’s -1 (binding) as it contains compiled code (a .jar) [1], an ASF release must consist of source code only. The other issue are minor IMO and can be fixed in a future release. I checked: - incubating in name - signature and hashed correct - LICENSE is fine - NOTICE has some

[VOTE] Release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2

Hello All, This is a call for vote to release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2 The Apache Zipkin community has voted on and approved a proposal to release Apache Zipkin Brave Karaf (Incubating) version 0.1.2. We now kindly request the Incubator PMC members review and vote on

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

> > Would be interesting if this project includes training for developing > Apache projects in any way, or would that make more sense under ComDev > or some other project? > I'm not sure if I understand the question. Could you rephrase? Do you mean training on "The Apache Way"? And maybe also

Re: [Cava] Suitable name search

I would like to suggest “Jal”, in reference to Indra’s net (or Indra jal) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indra%27s_net From the link: "Imagine a multidimensional spider's web in the early morning covered with dew drops. And every dew drop contains the reflection of all the other dew drops. And,

[Cava] Suitable name search

Hello all, As discussed previously, Cava is not a proper name for the proposal discussed last week on this list and published to the wiki [0]. I humbly would like to ask the community for feedback and proposals on a suitable name for this proposal, in line with the guidelines [1]. In

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

[X] +1 Accept Training into the Apache Incubator (binding) Bernd - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 7:23 AM Matt Sicker wrote: > +1 > > Would be interesting if this project includes training for developing > Apache projects in any way, or would that make more sense under ComDev > or some other project? > > On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 09:09, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > > > >

Re: [DISCUSS] Guidelines for distribution of incubating artefacts on other platforms

Weex Mentor here. Answers inline: On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:36 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > > We distribute artefacts through *CocoaPods* I'm with Justin: I'm not familiar with this either, but my first skim across their information doesn't indicate they'd be fundamentally different

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 Would be interesting if this project includes training for developing Apache projects in any way, or would that make more sense under ComDev or some other project? On Wed, 13 Feb 2019 at 09:09, Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > ср, 13 февр. 2019 г. в 18:05, Ciprian Borodescu >:

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (non-binding) ср, 13 февр. 2019 г. в 18:05, Ciprian Borodescu : > +1 > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:52 PM Thomas Weise wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui < > > asifdxtr...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > Regards

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:52 PM Thomas Weise wrote: > +1 (binding) > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui < > asifdxtr...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > Regards > > Asif > > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer < > >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

Hi +1(binding). Regards Liang Thomas Weise wrote > +1 (binding) > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui > asifdxtreme@ > > wrote: > >> +1 (binding) >> >> Regards >> Asif >> >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer < >> > j.feinauer@ >> wrote: >> >> > +1

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 6:40 AM Mohammad Asif Siddiqui wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Regards > Asif > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer < > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Regards Asif On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:09 PM Julian Feinauer < j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some time to > contribute! > > Julian > > Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" : > >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (non-binding) I really liked the idea from the start and probably will find some time to contribute! Julian Am 13.02.19, 15:18 schrieb "Kevin A. McGrail" : +1 Binding. I'll also try again to get Udacity, Udemy, Coursera, Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 Binding. I'll also try again to get Udacity, Udemy, Coursera, Pluralsight involved now that this is going to a formal incubator podling. I am hoping once a domino falls, more will help. Regards, KAM -- Kevin A. McGrail Member, Apache Software Foundation Chair Emeritus Apache SpamAssassin

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) -Vinay On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:58 PM Hans-Peter Zorn wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > Looking forward to work on this! > Thanks, > Hans-Peter > > > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke : > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (non-binding) Looking forward to work on this! Thanks, Hans-Peter > Am 13.02.2019 um 08:57 schrieb Lars Francke : > > Hi everyone, > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3]. > > According to the Incubator

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Great work and am looking forward to being involved. :-) Thanks Sharan On Wed, 13 Feb 2019, 08:58 Lars Francke, wrote: > Hi everyone, > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The > proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3]. > > According to the

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 binding, It seems to be some overlapping duty with Apache Infra. Anyway, would be helpful for Apache Projects or external open source projects. Very looking forward to the further step :-) Best Regards, Von Gosling > 在 2019年2月13日，下午3:57，Lars Francke 写道： > > Hi everyone, > > we've

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:03 AM Christofer Dutz wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Chris > > Am 13.02.19, 08:58 schrieb "Lars Francke" : > > Hi everyone, > > we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. > The > proposal itself can be found on the

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (binding) Chris Am 13.02.19, 08:58 schrieb "Lars Francke" : Hi everyone, we've discussed the proposal for the Training project in [1] and [2]. The proposal itself can be found on the wiki[3]. According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

Hi, On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 8:58 AM Lars Francke wrote: > ...According to the Incubator rules[4] I'd like to call a vote to accept the > new "Training" project as a podling in the Apache Incubator... +1 and I'm copying the proposal here, we usually do this for archiving purposes. -Bertrand

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

Hi, +1 (binding). I'm excited for this too! Kind Regards, Furkan KAMACI On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 11:38 AM Lars Francke wrote: > I'll also add my +1 (binding) > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:25 AM Sönke Liebau > wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) excited about moving this forward! :) > > > > On Wed,

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

I'll also add my +1 (binding) On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:25 AM Sönke Liebau wrote: > +1 (non-binding) excited about moving this forward! :) > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > +1 (binding) woking forward to being involved. > > > > Thanks, > > Justin >

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

+1 (non-binding) excited about moving this forward! :) On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 9:20 AM Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > +1 (binding) woking forward to being involved. > > Thanks, > Justin > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail:

Re: [VOTE] Accept Training into the Apache Incubator

Hi, +1 (binding) woking forward to being involved. Thanks, Justin - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org