-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Fri October 23 2009 4:45:26 pm Kevan Miller wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2009, at 1:27 PM, Josh Thompson wrote:
> > (Question to mentors: Do I need to vote in a successive email in
> > this thread,
> > or is this post an implicit vote?)
> You should either include an explicit +1 in the initial vote email, or
> "reply" in another email. Either is acceptable. I kind of prefer a
> separate email, but that's just me...
Okay - since I didn't include and explicit +1 in the initial message, I'll do
> Most votes will include a formal statement on what the vote is about.
> [ ] +1 yes, release VCL 2.1
> [ ] 0 dunno
> [ ] -1 no, don't release VCL 2.1 (provide reasons).
Now that you mention it, I remember seeing that in some places. Somehow, I
came up with an example email calling for a vote that I linked to off of this
direct link to email:
That email doesn't include what you mentioned. I'll revise the release docs
to explain that part should be in there and maybe find a better example
> This is the strangest Apache "release" that I've ever seen... Taking
> some getting used to... I have some questions/comments. Haven't
> decided on my vote, yet.
Since this is the only Apache "release" those of us from NCSU have ever seen,
can you explain further why you say it is so strange? I thought the release
procedures page followed the suggested guidelines pretty well. I'm assuming
the items listed below aren't explaining that but are points you think need
addressing before finalizing a release.
> * web/.ht-inc/conf.php contains references to Shibboleth and UNC. I
> assume that's holdover from VCL's origins.
I left it in there as an example of how Shibboleth authentication would be
added in. It is commented out, but I can completely remove it if you think
it is confusing.
> * Instructions on installation, prereqs, etc should be clear that a
> user must determine the licensing of the technologies that you are
> requiring/referring to/downloading. It's not clear to me if that
> information is being conveyed. Clearly, you require GPL, LGPL, and
> microsoft proprietary artifacts. Wondering how much of this needs to
> flow through legal-discuss... Prolly Alan and Matt have thought about
> this already.
The web frontend only requires dojo to be installed. It is Apache Licensed.
The licensing for JPGraph is explained in the INSTALLATION file as well as
the fact that it is not needed. There are several options on how you use
VCL, and therefore what external software is needed for use by the backend.
I'll defer to Aaron and Andy to answer this point further since the backend
is not my area of focus.
> * managementnode/bin/install_perl_libs.pl will download install
> libraries, IIUC. What are the licenses of these artifacts? Users need
> to be made aware of what you are doing for them...
Thanks for your comments. We want this to be as successful and "correctly
released" as possible.
Virtual Computing Lab (VCL)
North Carolina State University
my GPG/PGP key can be found at www.keyserver.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----