You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pirk.apache.org by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com> on 2016/08/14 03:19:53 UTC
[VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Hi,
This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on Wednesday
,
August 16, 2016.
The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion = 0.1.0'.
You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIRK-47?jql=
project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
Please vote accordingly:
[ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
[ ] +0, I don't care either way,
[ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
Thanks!
Ellison Anne
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
+1
Verified everything...
Sounds good Suneel - please call the VOTE on the general incubator distro
once our internal PIrk VOTE is closed and passes. Thanks!
On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 1:10 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> I will post this again to general@incubator when this VOTE is called on
> that mail distro.
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> 1. Downloaded the source.jar ---> Ran a clean build and verified that all
> tests pass
> 2. Checked and verified the .asc signatures of artifacts
> 3. Checked the MD5 and SHA1 sums of the artifacts
> 4. Checked the NOTICE and LICENSE files
>
> Suneel
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> >
> > The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> > Wednesday
> > ,
> > August 16, 2016.
> >
> > The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> > org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> > pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> >
> > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> 0.1.0'.
> > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> >
> > The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> >
> > Please vote accordingly:
> >
> > [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Ellison Anne
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org>.
I will post this again to general@incubator when this VOTE is called on
that mail distro.
+1 (binding)
1. Downloaded the source.jar ---> Ran a clean build and verified that all
tests pass
2. Checked and verified the .asc signatures of artifacts
3. Checked the MD5 and SHA1 sums of the artifacts
4. Checked the NOTICE and LICENSE files
Suneel
On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 11:19 PM, Ellison Anne Williams <
eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
>
> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> Wednesday
> ,
> August 16, 2016.
>
> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>
> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion = 0.1.0'.
> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>
> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>
> Please vote accordingly:
>
> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ellison Anne
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
I concur.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 8:37 PM, Ellison Anne Williams <
eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> With Suneel's pom updates to remove the offending openjdk files from
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar, the only remaining issue is the
> jboss-logging license issue.
>
> This appears to be resolved via the Apache Licensing rules in the last
> email and via placing documentation similar to Spark's in the NOTICE file.
> Mentors - Please confirm that this is the case.
>
> If these are settled, then we just have to update our NOTICE and LICENSE
> files.
>
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ok - after a bit of digging, here is what I found on the
> > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar issue with the phantom
> jboss-logging
> > license file.
> >
> > The culprit is netty. If you take a look at META-INF/maven/io.netty/netty
> > when you unjar, you will see the netty pom which contains the following:
> >
> > <!-- Logging frameworks - completely optional -->
> >
> > ......(dependencies for other logging frameworks).....
> >
> > <dependency>
> >
> > <groupId>org.jboss.logging</groupId>
> >
> > <artifactId>jboss-logging-spi</artifactId>
> >
> > <version>2.1.2.GA</version>
> >
> > <scope>compile</scope>
> >
> > <optional>true</optional>
> >
> > </dependency>
> >
> > This is pulled in from Spark and other Hadoop places.
> >
> > Reading the Apache Licensing info carefully, it appears that it is *not*
> a
> > licensing issue as the code does not distribute it and it is used only
> for
> > optional features. See http://www.apache.org/legal/
> > resolved.html#prohibited and http://www.apache.org/
> > legal/resolved.html#optional.
> >
> > Also, Spark deals with it in its NOTICE file as follows (
> > https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE):
> >
> > This product optionally depends on 'JBoss Logging', a logging framework,
> > which can be obtained at:
> >
> > * LICENSE:
> > * license/LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt (GNU LGPL 2.1)
> > * HOMEPAGE:
> > * http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/common/common-logging-spi/
> >
> >
> > Thus, it seems that we can stand on the Apache Licensing rules and follow
> > Spark's lead and include similar language in our NOTICE file.
> >
> > Can we make the same argument about the org.openjdk.jmh.infra.
> generated.*
> > files in the apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar? If so, we can
> make
> > them part of the RAT exclusions and that solve that issue.
> >
> > From there, cleaning up the LICENSE and NOTICE files as previously
> pointed
> > out in the thread should do it.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> >> > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> >> 0.1.0'.
> >> > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> >> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> >> > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> >>
> >> BTW (just so you don't inadvertently send that URL to the
> >> general@incubator.a.o list vote).
> >>
> >> That URL points to one specific JIRA issue. The release notes URL is:
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
> >> ctId=12320320&version=12338109
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Tim
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
On 16/08/16 01:37, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> With Suneel's pom updates to remove the offending openjdk files from
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar, the only remaining issue is the
> jboss-logging license issue.
>
> This appears to be resolved via the Apache Licensing rules in the last
> email and via placing documentation similar to Spark's in the NOTICE file.
> Mentors - Please confirm that this is the case.
Yes, this is fine. Good job tracking it down!
> If these are settled, then we just have to update our NOTICE and LICENSE
> files.
Agreed. Unfortunately, NOTICE and LICENSE files always require real
work, but of course they are important for consumers to understand what
they are getting; and quite rightly the ASF is stringent about ensuring
the correctness and completeness of these files.
Thank you for tackling this. As the project progresses, we need to
ensure that any new dependencies are reflected in these files too.
Regards,
Tim
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ok - after a bit of digging, here is what I found on the
>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar issue with the phantom jboss-logging
>> license file.
>>
>> The culprit is netty. If you take a look at META-INF/maven/io.netty/netty
>> when you unjar, you will see the netty pom which contains the following:
>>
>> <!-- Logging frameworks - completely optional -->
>>
>> ......(dependencies for other logging frameworks).....
>>
>> <dependency>
>>
>> <groupId>org.jboss.logging</groupId>
>>
>> <artifactId>jboss-logging-spi</artifactId>
>>
>> <version>2.1.2.GA</version>
>>
>> <scope>compile</scope>
>>
>> <optional>true</optional>
>>
>> </dependency>
>>
>> This is pulled in from Spark and other Hadoop places.
>>
>> Reading the Apache Licensing info carefully, it appears that it is *not* a
>> licensing issue as the code does not distribute it and it is used only for
>> optional features. See http://www.apache.org/legal/
>> resolved.html#prohibited and http://www.apache.org/
>> legal/resolved.html#optional.
>>
>> Also, Spark deals with it in its NOTICE file as follows (
>> https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE):
>>
>> This product optionally depends on 'JBoss Logging', a logging framework,
>> which can be obtained at:
>>
>> * LICENSE:
>> * license/LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt (GNU LGPL 2.1)
>> * HOMEPAGE:
>> * http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/common/common-logging-spi/
>>
>>
>> Thus, it seems that we can stand on the Apache Licensing rules and follow
>> Spark's lead and include similar language in our NOTICE file.
>>
>> Can we make the same argument about the org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
>> files in the apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar? If so, we can make
>> them part of the RAT exclusions and that solve that issue.
>>
>> From there, cleaning up the LICENSE and NOTICE files as previously pointed
>> out in the thread should do it.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
>>> 0.1.0'.
>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>>>
>>> BTW (just so you don't inadvertently send that URL to the
>>> general@incubator.a.o list vote).
>>>
>>> That URL points to one specific JIRA issue. The release notes URL is:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
>>> ctId=12320320&version=12338109
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
With Suneel's pom updates to remove the offending openjdk files from
apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar, the only remaining issue is the
jboss-logging license issue.
This appears to be resolved via the Apache Licensing rules in the last
email and via placing documentation similar to Spark's in the NOTICE file.
Mentors - Please confirm that this is the case.
If these are settled, then we just have to update our NOTICE and LICENSE
files.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Ellison Anne Williams <
eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok - after a bit of digging, here is what I found on the
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar issue with the phantom jboss-logging
> license file.
>
> The culprit is netty. If you take a look at META-INF/maven/io.netty/netty
> when you unjar, you will see the netty pom which contains the following:
>
> <!-- Logging frameworks - completely optional -->
>
> ......(dependencies for other logging frameworks).....
>
> <dependency>
>
> <groupId>org.jboss.logging</groupId>
>
> <artifactId>jboss-logging-spi</artifactId>
>
> <version>2.1.2.GA</version>
>
> <scope>compile</scope>
>
> <optional>true</optional>
>
> </dependency>
>
> This is pulled in from Spark and other Hadoop places.
>
> Reading the Apache Licensing info carefully, it appears that it is *not* a
> licensing issue as the code does not distribute it and it is used only for
> optional features. See http://www.apache.org/legal/
> resolved.html#prohibited and http://www.apache.org/
> legal/resolved.html#optional.
>
> Also, Spark deals with it in its NOTICE file as follows (
> https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE):
>
> This product optionally depends on 'JBoss Logging', a logging framework,
> which can be obtained at:
>
> * LICENSE:
> * license/LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt (GNU LGPL 2.1)
> * HOMEPAGE:
> * http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/common/common-logging-spi/
>
>
> Thus, it seems that we can stand on the Apache Licensing rules and follow
> Spark's lead and include similar language in our NOTICE file.
>
> Can we make the same argument about the org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> files in the apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar? If so, we can make
> them part of the RAT exclusions and that solve that issue.
>
> From there, cleaning up the LICENSE and NOTICE files as previously pointed
> out in the thread should do it.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>> > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
>> 0.1.0'.
>> > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>> > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>>
>> BTW (just so you don't inadvertently send that URL to the
>> general@incubator.a.o list vote).
>>
>> That URL points to one specific JIRA issue. The release notes URL is:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje
>> ctId=12320320&version=12338109
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
Ok - after a bit of digging, here is what I found on the
apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar issue with the phantom jboss-logging
license file.
The culprit is netty. If you take a look at META-INF/maven/io.netty/netty
when you unjar, you will see the netty pom which contains the following:
<!-- Logging frameworks - completely optional -->
......(dependencies for other logging frameworks).....
<dependency>
<groupId>org.jboss.logging</groupId>
<artifactId>jboss-logging-spi</artifactId>
<version>2.1.2.GA</version>
<scope>compile</scope>
<optional>true</optional>
</dependency>
This is pulled in from Spark and other Hadoop places.
Reading the Apache Licensing info carefully, it appears that it is *not* a
licensing issue as the code does not distribute it and it is used only for
optional features. See http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#prohibited
and http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional.
Also, Spark deals with it in its NOTICE file as follows (
https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE):
This product optionally depends on 'JBoss Logging', a logging framework,
which can be obtained at:
* LICENSE:
* license/LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt (GNU LGPL 2.1)
* HOMEPAGE:
* http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/common/common-logging-spi/
Thus, it seems that we can stand on the Apache Licensing rules and follow
Spark's lead and include similar language in our NOTICE file.
Can we make the same argument about the org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
files in the apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar? If so, we can make
them part of the RAT exclusions and that solve that issue.
From there, cleaning up the LICENSE and NOTICE files as previously pointed
out in the thread should do it.
Thoughts?
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> 0.1.0'.
> > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>
> BTW (just so you don't inadvertently send that URL to the
> general@incubator.a.o list vote).
>
> That URL points to one specific JIRA issue. The release notes URL is:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?
> projectId=12320320&version=12338109
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion = 0.1.0'.
> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
BTW (just so you don't inadvertently send that URL to the
general@incubator.a.o list vote).
That URL points to one specific JIRA issue. The release notes URL is:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12320320&version=12338109
Regards,
Tim
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
This vote is cancelled and a new one will be called once the PR for the
updated LICENSE and NOTICE files is accepted.
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 1:00 PM, Ellison Anne Williams <
eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just submitted a PR with updated LICENSE and NOTICE files... Happy to
> modify if I've missed anything.
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 16/08/16 14:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>> > @Tim run 'mvn clean' first and please try again
>>
>> Hmm, not sure what I did there.
>>
>> I retried with
>> $ git checkout 713ed76
>>
>> and the JARs no longer contain the openjdk files.
>> Apologies for the noise.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
>> > eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Me too - when I just checked out a clean copy of 0.1.0 and ran:
>> >>
>> >> mvn clean
>> >>
>> >> mvn release:prepare -Psigned_release -Darguments="-DskipTests"
>> >> -DdryRun=true
>> >>
>> >> and take a look at apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar,
>> I
>> >> only have org/apache/pirk/*
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Suneel Marthi <
>> suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I just checked, and don't see that 😷
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
>> >>> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Hmmm... I didn't see them last night - will double check
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <
>> >> t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn
>> >> -Psigned_release
>> >>>>>>>> release:prepare
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing,
>> >> I'll
>> >>>> wait
>> >>>>>>> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to
>> >>> waiting
>> >>>>> for
>> >>>>>> the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks again Tim.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
>> >>>>> mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> <blah/>
>> >>>>> [INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
>> >>>>> [INFO]
>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> ------------
>> >>>>> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
>> >>>>> [INFO]
>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> ------------
>> >>>>> [INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
>> >>>>> [INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
>> >>>>> [INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
>> >>>>> [INFO]
>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> ------------
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> and in the newly created
>> >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I still see files in there
>> >>>>> /org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I wasn't expecting that.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>> Tim
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <
>> >>>>> suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being
>> >> inherited
>> >>>> from
>> >>>>>>>>> parent POM.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from
>> >>> test/.
>> >>>>> We
>> >>>>>>>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release,
>> >>>> otherwise
>> >>>>> I
>> >>>>>>>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <
>> >>> t.p.ellison@gmail.com
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk
>> >> (incubating).
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be
>> >> closed
>> >>> on
>> >>>>>>>>>> Wednesday
>> >>>>>>>>>>> ,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> August 16, 2016.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here:
>> >> https://repository.apache
>> >>> .
>> >>>>>>>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
>> >>>>>>>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with
>> >>> 'FixVersion =
>> >>>>>>>>>> 0.1.0'.
>> >>>>>>>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> >>>>>>>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>> >>>>>>>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>> >>> because...
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Ellison Anne
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
>> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
>> >>>>>>>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - RAT checks pass.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
>> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
>> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> >>>>>>>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
>> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
>> >>>>>>>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
>> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - not tested
>> >>>>>>>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
>> >>>>>>>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> jar contains
>> >>>>>>>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
>> >>>>>>>>>> JUnit license
>> >>>>>>>>>> /LICENSE.txt
>> >>>>>>>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
>> >>>>>>>>>> /license/*
>> >>>>>>>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for
>> >> XML
>> >>>>> APIs.
>> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
>> >>>>>>>>>> ALv2
>> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
>> >>>>>>>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.
>> >>>>> neuralnet)
>> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/license/*
>> >>>>>>>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
>> >>>>>>>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
>> >>>>>>>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
>> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
>> >>>>>>>>>> Commons Math notice file.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
>> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> >>>>>>>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
>> >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
>> >>>>>>>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
>> >>>>>>>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
>> >>>>>>>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on
>> >> these
>> >>>>> files.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
>> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> >>>>>>>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
>> >>>>>>>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
>> >>>>>>>>>> - No further testing.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the
>> >> issues
>> >>>>>>>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Notably:
>> >>>>>>>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release.
>> >> If
>> >>>> true
>> >>>>>>>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license
>> >>> text
>> >>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for
>> >> Pirk's
>> >>>>>>>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
>> >>>>>>> redistributing
>> >>>>>>>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a
>> >>> number
>> >>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a
>> >>>>> single
>> >>>>>>>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files,
>> >> and
>> >>>>>>> exclude
>> >>>>>>>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as
>> >>>> required.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>> >>>>>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort
>> >> to
>> >>>>>>>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release,
>> >>> so
>> >>>> we
>> >>>>>>>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time
>> >>>>> round.
>> >>>>>>>>>> Just a thought.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>>>>>>> Tim
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
Just submitted a PR with updated LICENSE and NOTICE files... Happy to
modify if I've missed anything.
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16/08/16 14:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > @Tim run 'mvn clean' first and please try again
>
> Hmm, not sure what I did there.
>
> I retried with
> $ git checkout 713ed76
>
> and the JARs no longer contain the openjdk files.
> Apologies for the noise.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> > eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Me too - when I just checked out a clean copy of 0.1.0 and ran:
> >>
> >> mvn clean
> >>
> >> mvn release:prepare -Psigned_release -Darguments="-DskipTests"
> >> -DdryRun=true
> >>
> >> and take a look at apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar, I
> >> only have org/apache/pirk/*
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Suneel Marthi <suneel.marthi@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I just checked, and don't see that 😷
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> >>> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hmmm... I didn't see them last night - will double check
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <
> >> t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> >>>>>>>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn
> >> -Psigned_release
> >>>>>>>> release:prepare
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing,
> >> I'll
> >>>> wait
> >>>>>>> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to
> >>> waiting
> >>>>> for
> >>>>>> the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks again Tim.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
> >>>>> mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <blah/>
> >>>>> [INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
> >>>>> [INFO]
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ------------
> >>>>> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> >>>>> [INFO]
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ------------
> >>>>> [INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
> >>>>> [INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
> >>>>> [INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
> >>>>> [INFO]
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and in the newly created
> >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I still see files in there
> >>>>> /org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I wasn't expecting that.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>> Tim
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <
> >>>>> suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being
> >> inherited
> >>>> from
> >>>>>>>>> parent POM.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from
> >>> test/.
> >>>>> We
> >>>>>>>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release,
> >>>> otherwise
> >>>>> I
> >>>>>>>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <
> >>> t.p.ellison@gmail.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk
> >> (incubating).
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be
> >> closed
> >>> on
> >>>>>>>>>> Wednesday
> >>>>>>>>>>> ,
> >>>>>>>>>>> August 16, 2016.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here:
> >> https://repository.apache
> >>> .
> >>>>>>>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> >>>>>>>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with
> >>> 'FixVersion =
> >>>>>>>>>> 0.1.0'.
> >>>>>>>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> >>>>>>>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> >>>>>>>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> >>> because...
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Ellison Anne
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> >>>>>>>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
> >>>>>>>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> >>>>>>>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> >>>>>>>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
> >>>>>>>>>> - RAT checks pass.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>>>>>>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>>>>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
> >>>>>>>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
> >>>>>>>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>>>>>>> - not tested
> >>>>>>>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
> >>>>>>>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> jar contains
> >>>>>>>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
> >>>>>>>>>> JUnit license
> >>>>>>>>>> /LICENSE.txt
> >>>>>>>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> >>>>>>>>>> /license/*
> >>>>>>>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for
> >> XML
> >>>>> APIs.
> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
> >>>>>>>>>> ALv2
> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> >>>>>>>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.
> >>>>> neuralnet)
> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/license/*
> >>>>>>>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> >>>>>>>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
> >>>>>>>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
> >>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> >>>>>>>>>> Commons Math notice file.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>>>>>>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
> >>>>>>>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> >>>>>>>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> >>>>>>>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> >>>>>>>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on
> >> these
> >>>>> files.
> >>>>>>>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> >>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> >>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>>>>>>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> >>>>>>>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> >>>>>>>>>> - No further testing.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the
> >> issues
> >>>>>>>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Notably:
> >>>>>>>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release.
> >> If
> >>>> true
> >>>>>>>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license
> >>> text
> >>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for
> >> Pirk's
> >>>>>>>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
> >>>>>>> redistributing
> >>>>>>>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a
> >>> number
> >>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a
> >>>>> single
> >>>>>>>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files,
> >> and
> >>>>>>> exclude
> >>>>>>>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as
> >>>> required.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> >>>>>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort
> >> to
> >>>>>>>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release,
> >>> so
> >>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time
> >>>>> round.
> >>>>>>>>>> Just a thought.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>> Tim
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
On 16/08/16 14:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> @Tim run 'mvn clean' first and please try again
Hmm, not sure what I did there.
I retried with
$ git checkout 713ed76
and the JARs no longer contain the openjdk files.
Apologies for the noise.
Regards,
Tim
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Me too - when I just checked out a clean copy of 0.1.0 and ran:
>>
>> mvn clean
>>
>> mvn release:prepare -Psigned_release -Darguments="-DskipTests"
>> -DdryRun=true
>>
>> and take a look at apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar, I
>> only have org/apache/pirk/*
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I just checked, and don't see that \U0001f637
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
>>> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hmmm... I didn't see them last night - will double check
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <
>> t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>>>>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn
>> -Psigned_release
>>>>>>>> release:prepare
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing,
>> I'll
>>>> wait
>>>>>>> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to
>>> waiting
>>>>> for
>>>>>> the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks again Tim.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
>>>>> mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
>>>>>
>>>>> <blah/>
>>>>> [INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
>>>>> [INFO]
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ------------
>>>>> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
>>>>> [INFO]
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ------------
>>>>> [INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
>>>>> [INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
>>>>> [INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
>>>>> [INFO]
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> and in the newly created
>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
>>>>>
>>>>> I still see files in there
>>>>> /org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
>>>>>
>>>>> I wasn't expecting that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <
>>>>> suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being
>> inherited
>>>> from
>>>>>>>>> parent POM.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from
>>> test/.
>>>>> We
>>>>>>>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release,
>>>> otherwise
>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <
>>> t.p.ellison@gmail.com
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk
>> (incubating).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be
>> closed
>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday
>>>>>>>>>>> ,
>>>>>>>>>>> August 16, 2016.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here:
>> https://repository.apache
>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
>>>>>>>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with
>>> 'FixVersion =
>>>>>>>>>> 0.1.0'.
>>>>>>>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>>>>>>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>>>>>>>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>>> because...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ellison Anne
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
>>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>>>>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
>>>>>>>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
>>>>>>>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
>>>>>>>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
>>>>>>>>>> - RAT checks pass.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
>>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
>>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>>>>>>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
>>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>>>>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
>>>>>>>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
>>>>>>>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
>>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>>>>>>> - not tested
>>>>>>>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
>>>>>>>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> jar contains
>>>>>>>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
>>>>>>>>>> JUnit license
>>>>>>>>>> /LICENSE.txt
>>>>>>>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
>>>>>>>>>> /license/*
>>>>>>>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for
>> XML
>>>>> APIs.
>>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
>>>>>>>>>> ALv2
>>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
>>>>>>>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.
>>>>> neuralnet)
>>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/license/*
>>>>>>>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
>>>>>>>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
>>>>>>>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
>>>>>>>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
>>>>>>>>>> Commons Math notice file.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
>>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>>>>>>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
>>>>>>>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
>>>>>>>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
>>>>>>>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on
>> these
>>>>> files.
>>>>>>>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
>>>>>>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>>>>>>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>>>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>>>>>>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
>>>>>>>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
>>>>>>>>>> - No further testing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the
>> issues
>>>>>>>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Notably:
>>>>>>>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release.
>> If
>>>> true
>>>>>>>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license
>>> text
>>>>>>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for
>> Pirk's
>>>>>>>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
>>>>>>> redistributing
>>>>>>>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a
>>> number
>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a
>>>>> single
>>>>>>>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files,
>> and
>>>>>>> exclude
>>>>>>>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as
>>>> required.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort
>> to
>>>>>>>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release,
>>> so
>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time
>>>>> round.
>>>>>>>>>> Just a thought.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
@Tim run 'mvn clean' first and please try again
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Me too - when I just checked out a clean copy of 0.1.0 and ran:
>
> mvn clean
>
> mvn release:prepare -Psigned_release -Darguments="-DskipTests"
> -DdryRun=true
>
> and take a look at apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar, I
> only have org/apache/pirk/*
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I just checked, and don't see that 😷
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> > eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hmmm... I didn't see them last night - will double check
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <
> t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > > > >>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn
> -Psigned_release
> > > > >>> release:prepare
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing,
> I'll
> > > wait
> > > > >> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to
> > waiting
> > > > for
> > > > > the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks again Tim.
> > > >
> > > > So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
> > > > mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
> > > >
> > > > <blah/>
> > > > [INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
> > > > [INFO]
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------------
> > > > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> > > > [INFO]
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------------
> > > > [INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
> > > > [INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
> > > > [INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
> > > > [INFO]
> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------------
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > and in the newly created
> > > > apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
> > > >
> > > > I still see files in there
> > > > /org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
> > > >
> > > > I wasn't expecting that.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Tim
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <
> > > > suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being
> inherited
> > > from
> > > > >>>> parent POM.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from
> > test/.
> > > > We
> > > > >>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release,
> > > otherwise
> > > > I
> > > > >>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <
> > t.p.ellison@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > > > >>>>>> Hi,
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk
> (incubating).
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be
> closed
> > on
> > > > >>>>> Wednesday
> > > > >>>>>> ,
> > > > >>>>>> August 16, 2016.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here:
> https://repository.apache
> > .
> > > > >>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> > > > >>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with
> > 'FixVersion =
> > > > >>>>> 0.1.0'.
> > > > >>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> > > > >>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > > > >>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > > > >>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > > > >>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > because...
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Thanks!
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Ellison Anne
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
> > > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> > > > >>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
> > > > >>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> > > > >>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> > > > >>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
> > > > >>>>> - RAT checks pass.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
> > > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> > > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > > >>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
> > > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > > >>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
> > > > >>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
> > > > >>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> > > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> > > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > > >>>>> - not tested
> > > > >>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
> > > > >>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> jar contains
> > > > >>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
> > > > >>>>> JUnit license
> > > > >>>>> /LICENSE.txt
> > > > >>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> > > > >>>>> /license/*
> > > > >>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for
> XML
> > > > APIs.
> > > > >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
> > > > >>>>> ALv2
> > > > >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> > > > >>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.
> > > > neuralnet)
> > > > >>>>> /META-INF/license/*
> > > > >>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> > > > >>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> > > > >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
> > > > >>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
> > > > >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> > > > >>>>> Commons Math notice file.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> > > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> > > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > > >>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
> > > > >>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> > > > >>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> > > > >>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> > > > >>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on
> these
> > > > files.
> > > > >>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> > > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> > > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > > >>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> > > > >>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> > > > >>>>> - No further testing.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the
> issues
> > > > >>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Notably:
> > > > >>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release.
> If
> > > true
> > > > >>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license
> > text
> > > > >>>>> should be removed.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for
> Pirk's
> > > > >>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
> > > > >> redistributing
> > > > >>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a
> > number
> > > of
> > > > >>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a
> > > > single
> > > > >>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files,
> and
> > > > >> exclude
> > > > >>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as
> > > required.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> > > > >>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort
> to
> > > > >>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release,
> > so
> > > we
> > > > >>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time
> > > > round.
> > > > >>>>> Just a thought.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Regards,
> > > > >>>>> Tim
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
Also, I will take a stab at correcting our LICENSE and NOTICE files and
issue a PR accordingly.
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Me too - when I just checked out a clean copy of 0.1.0 and ran:
>
> mvn clean
>
> mvn release:prepare -Psigned_release -Darguments="-DskipTests"
> -DdryRun=true
>
> and take a look at apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar, I
> only have org/apache/pirk/*
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I just checked, and don't see that 😷
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
>> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hmmm... I didn't see them last night - will double check
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>> > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>> > > >>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn
>> -Psigned_release
>> > > >>> release:prepare
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing, I'll
>> > wait
>> > > >> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > > I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to
>> waiting
>> > > for
>> > > > the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks again Tim.
>> > >
>> > > So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
>> > > mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
>> > >
>> > > <blah/>
>> > > [INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
>> > > [INFO]
>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------
>> > > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
>> > > [INFO]
>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------
>> > > [INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
>> > > [INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
>> > > [INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
>> > > [INFO]
>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > and in the newly created
>> > > apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
>> > >
>> > > I still see files in there
>> > > /org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
>> > >
>> > > I wasn't expecting that.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Tim
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <
>> > > suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited
>> > from
>> > > >>>> parent POM.
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from
>> test/.
>> > > We
>> > > >>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release,
>> > otherwise
>> > > I
>> > > >>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <
>> t.p.ellison@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > >>>> wrote:
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>> > > >>>>>> Hi,
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be
>> closed on
>> > > >>>>> Wednesday
>> > > >>>>>> ,
>> > > >>>>>> August 16, 2016.
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here:
>> https://repository.apache.
>> > > >>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
>> > > >>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with
>> 'FixVersion =
>> > > >>>>> 0.1.0'.
>> > > >>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> > > >>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>> > > >>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>> > > >>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>> > > >>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>> because...
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> Thanks!
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>> Ellison Anne
>> > > >>>>>>
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
>> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
>> > > >>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
>> > > >>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
>> > > >>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
>> > > >>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
>> > > >>>>> - RAT checks pass.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
>> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
>> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> > > >>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
>> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> > > >>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
>> > > >>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
>> > > >>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
>> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> > > >>>>> - not tested
>> > > >>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
>> > > >>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> jar contains
>> > > >>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
>> > > >>>>> JUnit license
>> > > >>>>> /LICENSE.txt
>> > > >>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
>> > > >>>>> /license/*
>> > > >>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML
>> > > APIs.
>> > > >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
>> > > >>>>> ALv2
>> > > >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
>> > > >>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.
>> > > neuralnet)
>> > > >>>>> /META-INF/license/*
>> > > >>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
>> > > >>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>> > > >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
>> > > >>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
>> > > >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
>> > > >>>>> Commons Math notice file.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
>> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> > > >>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
>> > > >>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
>> > > >>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
>> > > >>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
>> > > >>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these
>> > > files.
>> > > >>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
>> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> > > >>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
>> > > >>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
>> > > >>>>> - No further testing.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
>> > > >>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> Notably:
>> > > >>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If
>> > true
>> > > >>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license
>> text
>> > > >>>>> should be removed.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
>> > > >>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
>> > > >> redistributing
>> > > >>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a
>> number
>> > of
>> > > >>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a
>> > > single
>> > > >>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and
>> > > >> exclude
>> > > >>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as
>> > required.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>> > > >>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort
>> to
>> > > >>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release,
>> so
>> > we
>> > > >>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time
>> > > round.
>> > > >>>>> Just a thought.
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>> Regards,
>> > > >>>>> Tim
>> > > >>>>>
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
Me too - when I just checked out a clean copy of 0.1.0 and ran:
mvn clean
mvn release:prepare -Psigned_release -Darguments="-DskipTests" -DdryRun=true
and take a look at apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar, I
only have org/apache/pirk/*
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I just checked, and don't see that 😷
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hmmm... I didn't see them last night - will double check
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > > >>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn -Psigned_release
> > > >>> release:prepare
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> > > >>>
> > > >>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> > > >>
> > > >> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing, I'll
> > wait
> > > >> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to
> waiting
> > > for
> > > > the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks again Tim.
> > >
> > > So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
> > > mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
> > >
> > > <blah/>
> > > [INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
> > > [INFO]
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------
> > > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> > > [INFO]
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------
> > > [INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
> > > [INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
> > > [INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
> > > [INFO]
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------
> > >
> > >
> > > and in the newly created
> > > apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
> > >
> > > I still see files in there
> > > /org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
> > >
> > > I wasn't expecting that.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tim
> > >
> > >
> > > >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <
> > > suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited
> > from
> > > >>>> parent POM.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from
> test/.
> > > We
> > > >>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release,
> > otherwise
> > > I
> > > >>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <
> t.p.ellison@gmail.com
> > >
> > > >>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > > >>>>>> Hi,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed
> on
> > > >>>>> Wednesday
> > > >>>>>> ,
> > > >>>>>> August 16, 2016.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache
> .
> > > >>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> > > >>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with
> 'FixVersion =
> > > >>>>> 0.1.0'.
> > > >>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> > > >>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > > >>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > > >>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > > >>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> because...
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Thanks!
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Ellison Anne
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> > > >>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
> > > >>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> > > >>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> > > >>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
> > > >>>>> - RAT checks pass.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > >>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > >>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
> > > >>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
> > > >>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > >>>>> - not tested
> > > >>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
> > > >>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> jar contains
> > > >>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
> > > >>>>> JUnit license
> > > >>>>> /LICENSE.txt
> > > >>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> > > >>>>> /license/*
> > > >>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML
> > > APIs.
> > > >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
> > > >>>>> ALv2
> > > >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> > > >>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.
> > > neuralnet)
> > > >>>>> /META-INF/license/*
> > > >>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> > > >>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> > > >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
> > > >>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
> > > >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> > > >>>>> Commons Math notice file.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > >>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
> > > >>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> > > >>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> > > >>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> > > >>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these
> > > files.
> > > >>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> > > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> > > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > >>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> > > >>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> > > >>>>> - No further testing.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
> > > >>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Notably:
> > > >>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If
> > true
> > > >>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license
> text
> > > >>>>> should be removed.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
> > > >>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
> > > >> redistributing
> > > >>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a
> number
> > of
> > > >>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a
> > > single
> > > >>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and
> > > >> exclude
> > > >>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as
> > required.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> > > >>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
> > > >>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release,
> so
> > we
> > > >>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time
> > > round.
> > > >>>>> Just a thought.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Regards,
> > > >>>>> Tim
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
I just checked, and don't see that 😷
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmmm... I didn't see them last night - will double check
>
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > >>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn -Psigned_release
> > >>> release:prepare
> > >>>
> > >>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> > >>>
> > >>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> > >>
> > >> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing, I'll
> wait
> > >> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to waiting
> > for
> > > the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
> > >
> > > Thanks again Tim.
> >
> > So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
> > mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
> >
> > <blah/>
> > [INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > [INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
> > [INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
> > [INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
> > [INFO]
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> > and in the newly created
> > apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
> >
> > I still see files in there
> > /org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
> >
> > I wasn't expecting that.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tim
> >
> >
> > >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <
> > suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited
> from
> > >>>> parent POM.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from test/.
> > We
> > >>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release,
> otherwise
> > I
> > >>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com
> >
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > >>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> > >>>>> Wednesday
> > >>>>>> ,
> > >>>>>> August 16, 2016.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> > >>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> > >>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> > >>>>> 0.1.0'.
> > >>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> > >>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > >>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > >>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > >>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Ellison Anne
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
> > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> > >>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
> > >>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> > >>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> > >>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
> > >>>>> - RAT checks pass.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
> > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > >>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
> > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > >>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
> > >>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
> > >>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > >>>>> - not tested
> > >>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
> > >>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> jar contains
> > >>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
> > >>>>> JUnit license
> > >>>>> /LICENSE.txt
> > >>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> > >>>>> /license/*
> > >>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML
> > APIs.
> > >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
> > >>>>> ALv2
> > >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> > >>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.
> > neuralnet)
> > >>>>> /META-INF/license/*
> > >>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> > >>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> > >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
> > >>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
> > >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> > >>>>> Commons Math notice file.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > >>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
> > >>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> > >>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> > >>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> > >>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these
> > files.
> > >>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> > >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> > >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> > >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > >>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> > >>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> > >>>>> - No further testing.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
> > >>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Notably:
> > >>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If
> true
> > >>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
> > >>>>> should be removed.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
> > >>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
> > >> redistributing
> > >>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number
> of
> > >>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a
> > single
> > >>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and
> > >> exclude
> > >>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as
> required.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> > >>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
> > >>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so
> we
> > >>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time
> > round.
> > >>>>> Just a thought.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Regards,
> > >>>>> Tim
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
Hmmm... I didn't see them last night - will double check
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> >>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn -Psigned_release
> >>> release:prepare
> >>>
> >>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> >>>
> >>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> >>
> >> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing, I'll wait
> >> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
> >>
> >
> > I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to waiting
> for
> > the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
> >
> > Thanks again Tim.
>
> So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
> mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
>
> <blah/>
> [INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
> [INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
> [INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> and in the newly created
> apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
>
> I still see files in there
> /org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
>
> I wasn't expecting that.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <
> suneel.marthi@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
> >>>>
> >>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited from
> >>>> parent POM.
> >>>>
> >>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from test/.
> We
> >>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release, otherwise
> I
> >>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
> >>>>
> >>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> >>>>> Wednesday
> >>>>>> ,
> >>>>>> August 16, 2016.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> >>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> >>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> >>>>> 0.1.0'.
> >>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> >>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> >>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> >>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> >>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ellison Anne
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
> >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> >>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
> >>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> >>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> >>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
> >>>>> - RAT checks pass.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
> >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
> >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
> >>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
> >>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>> - not tested
> >>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
> >>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> jar contains
> >>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
> >>>>> JUnit license
> >>>>> /LICENSE.txt
> >>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> >>>>> /license/*
> >>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML
> APIs.
> >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
> >>>>> ALv2
> >>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> >>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.
> neuralnet)
> >>>>> /META-INF/license/*
> >>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> >>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
> >>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
> >>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> >>>>> Commons Math notice file.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
> >>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> >>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> >>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> >>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these
> files.
> >>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> >>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> >>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> >>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> >>>>> - No further testing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
> >>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Notably:
> >>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
> >>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
> >>>>> should be removed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
> >>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
> >> redistributing
> >>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
> >>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a
> single
> >>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and
> >> exclude
> >>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> >>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
> >>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
> >>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time
> round.
> >>>>> Just a thought.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>> Tim
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
On 16/08/16 13:06, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn -Psigned_release
>>> release:prepare
>>>
>>> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>>>
>>> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>>
>> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing, I'll wait
>> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
>>
>
> I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to waiting for
> the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
>
> Thanks again Tim.
So I checked out the 0.1.0 stream and ran
mvn -Psigned_release release:prepare -DdryRun=true
<blah/>
[INFO] Release preparation simulation complete.
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[INFO] Total time: 05:38 min
[INFO] Finished at: 2016-08-16T13:34:55+01:00
[INFO] Final Memory: 15M/448M
[INFO]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
and in the newly created
apache-pirk-0.1.1-incubating-SNAPSHOT-sources.jar
I still see files in there
/org/openjdk/jmh/infra/generated/*
I wasn't expecting that.
Regards,
Tim
>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
>>>>
>>>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited from
>>>> parent POM.
>>>>
>>>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from test/. We
>>>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release, otherwise I
>>>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
>>>>
>>>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
>>>>> Wednesday
>>>>>> ,
>>>>>> August 16, 2016.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
>>>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
>>>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
>>>>> 0.1.0'.
>>>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>>>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>>>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>>>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ellison Anne
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
>>>>> - sig & sums check ok.
>>>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
>>>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
>>>>> - Notice, License files ok.
>>>>> - RAT checks pass.
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) JavaDocs:
>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
>>>>>
>>>>> (3) Maven pom file:
>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>> - references to license and notices ok.
>>>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
>>>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
>>>>>
>>>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>> - not tested
>>>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
>>>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>>>>>
>>>>> jar contains
>>>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
>>>>> JUnit license
>>>>> /LICENSE.txt
>>>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
>>>>> /license/*
>>>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
>>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
>>>>> ALv2
>>>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
>>>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
>>>>> /META-INF/license/*
>>>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
>>>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
>>>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
>>>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
>>>>> Commons Math notice file.
>>>>>
>>>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
>>>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
>>>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
>>>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
>>>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
>>>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>>>>>
>>>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
>>>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>>>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
>>>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
>>>>> - No further testing.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
>>>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>>>>>
>>>>> Notably:
>>>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
>>>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
>>>>> should be removed.
>>>>>
>>>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
>>>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
>> redistributing
>>>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
>>>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
>>>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>>>>>
>>>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and
>> exclude
>>>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
>>>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
>>>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
>>>>> Just a thought.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn -Psigned_release
> > release:prepare
> >
> > Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> >
> > and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>
> I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing, I'll wait
> for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
>
I would appreciate if u could verify this fix now as opposed to waiting for
the new artifacts, always helps to have another pair of eyes.
Thanks again Tim.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
> >>
> >> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited from
> >> parent POM.
> >>
> >> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from test/. We
> >> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release, otherwise I
> >> don't think its a blocker for this release.
> >>
> >> Will be pushing a PR soon.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> >>>>
> >>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> >>> Wednesday
> >>>> ,
> >>>> August 16, 2016.
> >>>>
> >>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> >>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> >>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> >>>>
> >>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> >>> 0.1.0'.
> >>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> >>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> >>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> >>>>
> >>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> >>>>
> >>>> Please vote accordingly:
> >>>>
> >>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> >>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> >>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks!
> >>>>
> >>>> Ellison Anne
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
> >>>
> >>> Looking at the files in that directory...
> >>>
> >>> (1) Principal release artefact:
> >>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> >>> - sig & sums check ok.
> >>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> >>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> >>> - Notice, License files ok.
> >>> - RAT checks pass.
> >>>
> >>> (2) JavaDocs:
> >>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> >>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>> - JavaDocs render ok.
> >>>
> >>> (3) Maven pom file:
> >>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>> - references to license and notices ok.
> >>> - not checked building with it, but oking
> >>> as minimal diff with project pom.
> >>>
> >>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> >>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> >>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>> - not tested
> >>> ** notices and license files confusion.
> >>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
> >>>
> >>> jar contains
> >>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
> >>> JUnit license
> >>> /LICENSE.txt
> >>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> >>> /license/*
> >>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
> >>> /META-INF/LICENSE
> >>> ALv2
> >>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> >>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
> >>> /META-INF/license/*
> >>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> >>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> >>> /META-INF/NOTICE
> >>> Pirk (only) notice file.
> >>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> >>> Commons Math notice file.
> >>>
> >>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> >>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> >>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>> - Contains JMH generated source code
> >>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> >>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> >>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> >>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
> >>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
> >>>
> >>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> >>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> >>> - sig and sums check ok.
> >>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> >>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> >>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> >>> - No further testing.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
> >>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
> >>>
> >>> Notably:
> >>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
> >>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
> >>> should be removed.
> >>>
> >>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
> >>> dependencies as required by their terms.
> >>>
> >>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
> redistributing
> >>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
> >>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
> >>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
> >>>
> >>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and
> exclude
> >>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> >>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
> >>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
> >>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
> >>> Just a thought.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Tim
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
On 15/08/16 23:36, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn -Psigned_release
> release:prepare
>
> Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>
> and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
I trust you Suneel :-) Unless you want some separate testing, I'll wait
for the new artefacts to be created and do the full review again.
Regards,
Tim
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
>>
>> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited from
>> parent POM.
>>
>> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from test/. We
>> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release, otherwise I
>> don't think its a blocker for this release.
>>
>> Will be pushing a PR soon.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
>>>>
>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
>>> Wednesday
>>>> ,
>>>> August 16, 2016.
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>>>>
>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
>>> 0.1.0'.
>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>>>>
>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Ellison Anne
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>>>
>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
>>>
>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
>>> - sig & sums check ok.
>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
>>> - Notice, License files ok.
>>> - RAT checks pass.
>>>
>>> (2) JavaDocs:
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
>>>
>>> (3) Maven pom file:
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - references to license and notices ok.
>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
>>>
>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - not tested
>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>>>
>>> jar contains
>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
>>> JUnit license
>>> /LICENSE.txt
>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
>>> /license/*
>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
>>> ALv2
>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
>>> /META-INF/license/*
>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
>>> Commons Math notice file.
>>>
>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>>>
>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
>>> - No further testing.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>>>
>>> Notably:
>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
>>> should be removed.
>>>
>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
>>>
>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are redistributing
>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>>>
>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and exclude
>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>
>>>
>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
>>> Just a thought.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
To test this PR locally , perform a dry-run of mvn -Psigned_release
release:prepare
Verify target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
and target/apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
>
> I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited from
> parent POM.
>
> For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from test/. We
> should consider moving those to test/ for the next release, otherwise I
> don't think its a blocker for this release.
>
> Will be pushing a PR soon.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
>> >
>> > The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
>> Wednesday
>> > ,
>> > August 16, 2016.
>> >
>> > The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
>> > org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
>> > pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>> >
>> > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
>> 0.1.0'.
>> > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>> > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>> >
>> > The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>> >
>> > Please vote accordingly:
>> >
>> > [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>> > [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>> > [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > Ellison Anne
>> >
>>
>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>>
>> Looking at the files in that directory...
>>
>> (1) Principal release artefact:
>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
>> - sig & sums check ok.
>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
>> - Notice, License files ok.
>> - RAT checks pass.
>>
>> (2) JavaDocs:
>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> - JavaDocs render ok.
>>
>> (3) Maven pom file:
>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> - references to license and notices ok.
>> - not checked building with it, but oking
>> as minimal diff with project pom.
>>
>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> - not tested
>> ** notices and license files confusion.
>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>>
>> jar contains
>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
>> JUnit license
>> /LICENSE.txt
>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
>> /license/*
>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
>> /META-INF/LICENSE
>> ALv2
>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
>> /META-INF/license/*
>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>> /META-INF/NOTICE
>> Pirk (only) notice file.
>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
>> Commons Math notice file.
>>
>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> - Contains JMH generated source code
>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>>
>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>> - sig and sums check ok.
>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
>> - No further testing.
>>
>>
>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>>
>> Notably:
>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
>> should be removed.
>>
>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
>> dependencies as required by their terms.
>>
>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are redistributing
>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>>
>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and exclude
>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
>>
>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>>
>>
>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
>> Just a thought.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
I fixed issues 5 and 6 below.
I had to override <maven-source-plugin> which was being inherited from
parent POM.
For 6, the test material u r seeing is from src/test not from test/. We
should consider moving those to test/ for the next release, otherwise I
don't think its a blocker for this release.
Will be pushing a PR soon.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> >
> > The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> Wednesday
> > ,
> > August 16, 2016.
> >
> > The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> > org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> > pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> >
> > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> 0.1.0'.
> > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> >
> > The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> >
> > Please vote accordingly:
> >
> > [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Ellison Anne
> >
>
> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>
> Looking at the files in that directory...
>
> (1) Principal release artefact:
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> - sig & sums check ok.
> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> - Notice, License files ok.
> - RAT checks pass.
>
> (2) JavaDocs:
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> - JavaDocs render ok.
>
> (3) Maven pom file:
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - references to license and notices ok.
> - not checked building with it, but oking
> as minimal diff with project pom.
>
> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - not tested
> ** notices and license files confusion.
> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>
> jar contains
> /LICENSE-junit.txt
> JUnit license
> /LICENSE.txt
> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> /license/*
> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
> /META-INF/LICENSE
> ALv2
> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
> /META-INF/license/*
> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> /META-INF/NOTICE
> Pirk (only) notice file.
> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> Commons Math notice file.
>
> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> - Contains JMH generated source code
> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>
> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> - No further testing.
>
>
> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>
> Notably:
> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
> should be removed.
>
> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
> dependencies as required by their terms.
>
> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are redistributing
> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>
> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and exclude
> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>
>
> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
> Just a thought.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
On 15/08/16 14:48, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> Tim - thanks for going down into the jars and checking the licenses and
> notices - I assumed that they would be the same as what our source code
> contained - clearly, I was wrong.
np - that's why we all check them.
> I would like to go ahead and address the issue so that our next release is
> smooth and all of the steps for a successful release are established and
> documented.
ok, but... as I wrote earlier, it may be useful to go ahead with the
initial release containing all but the "exe jar". Fixing the other
items is not a big deal, I don't know how much work is going to be
involved with fixing that.
The releases and the process will grow in time, getting this far is a
great milestone and credit to the original code and folks here.
> Looks like we have issues in apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar and
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>
> 1.) apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>
> No matter what I did on my machine, I was not able to extract
by "extract" I assume you mean avoid including?
> /META-INF/license/*
> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>
> from apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar. Thus, I can't look at the
> specific problem.
>
> I can't see where jboss-logging is being pulled into the codebase (can't
> find the dependency). I am assuming that it must be pulling it in somewhere
> in order to add the corresponding license file. Any thoughts on this one?
I don't see it either, but then I'm not familiar with whatever is
pulling in these LICENSE files.
Running "mvn license:add-third-party" creates a full set of licenses for
our pom, and leads to interesting reading.
I see more dependencies that may appear in our exe JAR, and require
review, such as:
(CDDL 1.1) (GPL2 w/ CPE) jersey-client
(com.sun.jersey:jersey-client:1.9 - https://jersey.java.net/jersey-client/)
(CDDL 1.1) (GPL2 w/ CPE) jersey-core (com.sun.jersey:jersey-core:1.9 -
https://jersey.java.net/jersey-core/)
(CDDL 1.1) (GPL2 w/ CPE) jersey-json (com.sun.jersey:jersey-json:1.9 -
https://jersey.java.net/jersey-json/)
(CDDL 1.1) (GPL2 w/ CPE) jersey-server
(com.sun.jersey:jersey-server:1.9 - https://jersey.java.net/jersey-server/)
(CDDL 1.1) (GPL2 w/ CPE) jersey-guice
(com.sun.jersey.contribs:jersey-guice:1.9 -
https://jersey.java.net/jersey-contribs/jersey-guice/)
(CDDL 1.1) (GPL2 w/ CPE) JAXB RI (com.sun.xml.bind:jaxb-impl:2.2.3-1 -
http://jaxb.java.net/)
(Common Development and Distribution License (CDDL) v1.0) JavaBeans
Activation Framework (JAF) (javax.activation:activation:1.1 -
http://java.sun.com/products/javabeans/jaf/index.jsp)
(CDDL 1.1) (GPL2 w/ CPE) JAXB API bundle for GlassFish V3
(javax.xml.bind:jaxb-api:2.2.2 - https://jaxb.dev.java.net/)
(COMMON DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRIBUTION LICENSE (CDDL) Version 1.0) (GNU
General Public Library) Streaming API for XML
(javax.xml.stream:stax-api:1.0-2 - no url defined)
(Eclipse Public License 1.0) JUnit (junit:junit:4.12 - http://junit.org)
(Eclipse Public License v1.0) Eclipse JDT Core
(org.eclipse.jdt:core:3.1.1 - http://www.eclipse.org/jdt/)
(GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2, with the Classpath
exception) JMH Core (org.openjdk.jmh:jmh-core:1.11.3 -
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/jmh-core/)
(GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2, with the Classpath
exception) JMH Generators: Annotation Processors
(org.openjdk.jmh:jmh-generator-annprocess:1.11.3 -
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/jmh-generator-annprocess/)
CDDL 1.1 and EPL 1.0 are allowed in binary artefacts, provided we have a
prominent label in the distribution to bring it to users' attention,
e.g. in a README etc. We need to do that for the exe JAR README (only).
We know about the JMH dependency, and I think they are being correctly
excluded from the JAR.
> 2.) apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>
> Not sure why the org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.* files are appearing.
> They are under the openjdk license, GPL v2, which is not allowed by Apache.
Really? I've not seem anything that explains what license governs the
generated files. You may well be right though [ citation required ;-) ]
> The org.openjdk.jmh is marked as a 'provided' dependency in the pom (recall
> that there was a thread on what to do with this and the conclusion was to
> leave it in as provided as do other projects). Not sure why it would be
> showing up here. Should we mark it as 'runtime' instead of 'provided'?
> (asking before I take the time to try it out bc folks may already know how
> best to handle it).
>
> 3.) LICENSE and NOTICE files - It seems that you are suggesting that we
> manually append all of the dependency notices to our NOTICE file. Correct?
> It also appears that we also need to do the same with the LICENSE file:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses
I've done it manually before, yes. Having one place where users can
understand the LICENSEs and NOTICEs under which they take the code is
important.
I believe it will be acceptable if we reference them (see above) from
the main LICENSE/NOTICE file, or include the third-party licenses in a
directory rather than append them to a single file. Other mentors can
weigh in here with opinions.
> So, not done yet... I will rollback once we figure out what's going on (so
> that folks can still access the artifacts).
Yep, and still work from the 0.1.0 branch so that the development can
progress while the release is being tweaked.
Regards,
Tim
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the feedback. Tim.
>>
>> See my comments inline below.
>>
>> @Ellison lets rollback the release.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
>>>>
>>>> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
>>> Wednesday
>>>> ,
>>>> August 16, 2016.
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
>>>> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
>>>> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>>>>
>>>> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
>>> 0.1.0'.
>>>> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
>>> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
>>>> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>>>>
>>>> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>>>>
>>>> Please vote accordingly:
>>>>
>>>> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
>>>> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
>>>> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Ellison Anne
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>>>
>>> Looking at the files in that directory...
>>>
>>> (1) Principal release artefact:
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
>>> - sig & sums check ok.
>>> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
>>> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
>>> - Notice, License files ok.
>>> - RAT checks pass.
>>>
>>> (2) JavaDocs:
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>> - JavaDocs render ok.
>>>
>>> (3) Maven pom file:
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - references to license and notices ok.
>>> - not checked building with it, but oking
>>> as minimal diff with project pom.
>>>
>>> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - not tested
>>> ** notices and license files confusion.
>>> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>>>
>>> jar contains
>>> /LICENSE-junit.txt
>>> JUnit license
>>> /LICENSE.txt
>>> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
>>> /license/*
>>> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
>>> /META-INF/LICENSE
>>> ALv2
>>> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
>>> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
>>> /META-INF/license/*
>>> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
>>> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>>> /META-INF/NOTICE
>>> Pirk (only) notice file.
>>> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
>>> Commons Math notice file.
>>>
>>> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>> - Contains JMH generated source code
>>> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
>>> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
>>> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
>>> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
>>> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>>>
>>> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
>>> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
>>> - sig and sums check ok.
>>> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
>>> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
>>> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
>>> - No further testing.
>>>
>>>
>>> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
>>> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>>>
>>> Notably:
>>> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
>>> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
>>> should be removed.
>>>
>>> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
>>> dependencies as required by their terms.
>>>
>>
>> Definitely needs to be fixed.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are redistributing
>>> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
>>> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
>>> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>>>
>>> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and exclude
>>> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
>>>
>>
>> These are being excluded from generated binary jar, guess they need to be
>> excluded from the sources jar too.
>>
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>
>>>
>>> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
>>> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
>>> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
>>>
>>
>> Agree, I guess the reason we are even creating that uber artifact could be
>> for Hadoop jobs.
>> Let's drop it from this release and definitely fix it for the next.
>>
>> Just a thought.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
Longer term solution would be to split the project into multiple modules
(that make logical sense) and the benchmarks (along with JMH) would be a
module of its own (and not be packaged into the final artifacts
distribution).
I do think that as and when we add Storm, Flink, Spark and other backend
Responders, it would make more sense to create separate jar artifacts for
each of them to be individually published to maven.
Does it make sense to split Responder and Querier into separate modules and
publish them to maven as individual jars ? Would there be a Use Case
wherein I just need to plugin pirk-responder-spark as a dependency in my
project (and not having to deal with rest of Pirk artifacts).
The project distribution tar ball would have all of the core Pirk,
responder (with diff backends), querier etc... (but not benchmarks).
We don't have to do all of this for this release, but something we should
prioritize for the next one.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Ellison Anne Williams <
eawilliamspirk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tim - thanks for going down into the jars and checking the licenses and
> notices - I assumed that they would be the same as what our source code
> contained - clearly, I was wrong.
>
> I would like to go ahead and address the issue so that our next release is
> smooth and all of the steps for a successful release are established and
> documented.
>
> Looks like we have issues in apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar and
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>
> 1.) apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
>
> No matter what I did on my machine, I was not able to extract
>
> /META-INF/license/*
> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
>
> from apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar. Thus, I can't look at the
> specific problem.
>
> I can't see where jboss-logging is being pulled into the codebase (can't
> find the dependency). I am assuming that it must be pulling it in somewhere
> in order to add the corresponding license file. Any thoughts on this one?
>
Not sure myself either, this could be coming from a dependency ->
dependency -> ....
>
> 2.) apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
>
> Not sure why the org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.* files are appearing.
> They are under the openjdk license, GPL v2, which is not allowed by Apache.
> The org.openjdk.jmh is marked as a 'provided' dependency in the pom (recall
> that there was a thread on what to do with this and the conclusion was to
> leave it in as provided as do other projects). Not sure why it would be
> showing up here. Should we mark it as 'runtime' instead of 'provided'?
> (asking before I take the time to try it out bc folks may already know how
> best to handle it).
>
Let's set this to 'runtime'
>
> 3.) LICENSE and NOTICE files - It seems that you are suggesting that we
> manually append all of the dependency notices to our NOTICE file. Correct?
> It also appears that we also need to do the same with the LICENSE file:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-und
> er-several-licenses
We will have to fix this.
>
>
> So, not done yet... I will rollback once we figure out what's going on (so
> that folks can still access the artifacts).
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the feedback. Tim.
> >
> > See my comments inline below.
> >
> > @Ellison lets rollback the release.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> > > >
> > > > The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> > > Wednesday
> > > > ,
> > > > August 16, 2016.
> > > >
> > > > The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> > > > org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> > > > pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> > > >
> > > > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> > > 0.1.0'.
> > > > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> > > /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > > > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> > > >
> > > > The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> > > >
> > > > Please vote accordingly:
> > > >
> > > > [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > > > [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > > > [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Ellison Anne
> > > >
> > >
> > > Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
> > >
> > > Looking at the files in that directory...
> > >
> > > (1) Principal release artefact:
> > > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> > > - sig & sums check ok.
> > > - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> > > - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> > > - Notice, License files ok.
> > > - RAT checks pass.
> > >
> > > (2) JavaDocs:
> > > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> > > - sig and sums check ok.
> > > - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > - JavaDocs render ok.
> > >
> > > (3) Maven pom file:
> > > - sig and sums check ok.
> > > - references to license and notices ok.
> > > - not checked building with it, but oking
> > > as minimal diff with project pom.
> > >
> > > (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> > > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> > > - sig and sums check ok.
> > > - not tested
> > > ** notices and license files confusion.
> > > ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
> > >
> > > jar contains
> > > /LICENSE-junit.txt
> > > JUnit license
> > > /LICENSE.txt
> > > BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> > > /license/*
> > > contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
> > > /META-INF/LICENSE
> > > ALv2
> > > /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> > > ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
> > > /META-INF/license/*
> > > licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> > > LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> > > /META-INF/NOTICE
> > > Pirk (only) notice file.
> > > /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> > > Commons Math notice file.
> > >
> > > (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> > > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> > > - sig and sums check ok.
> > > - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > - Contains JMH generated source code
> > > org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> > > org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> > > ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> > > ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
> > > - Not tried compiling / further testing.
> > >
> > > (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> > > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> > > - sig and sums check ok.
> > > - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > > - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> > > - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> > > - No further testing.
> > >
> > >
> > > I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
> > > identified in (4) and possibly (5).
> > >
> > > Notably:
> > > (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
> > > this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
> > > should be removed.
> > >
> > > (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
> > > dependencies as required by their terms.
> > >
> >
> > Definitely needs to be fixed.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are
> redistributing
> > > them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
> > > NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
> > > complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
> > >
> > > (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and
> exclude
> > > them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
> > >
> >
> > These are being excluded from generated binary jar, guess they need to be
> > excluded from the sources jar too.
> >
> > >
> > > [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> > >
> > >
> > > p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
> > > resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
> > > may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
> > >
> >
> > Agree, I guess the reason we are even creating that uber artifact could
> be
> > for Hadoop jobs.
> > Let's drop it from this release and definitely fix it for the next.
> >
> > Just a thought.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Tim
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Ellison Anne Williams <ea...@gmail.com>.
Tim - thanks for going down into the jars and checking the licenses and
notices - I assumed that they would be the same as what our source code
contained - clearly, I was wrong.
I would like to go ahead and address the issue so that our next release is
smooth and all of the steps for a successful release are established and
documented.
Looks like we have issues in apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar and
apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
1.) apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
No matter what I did on my machine, I was not able to extract
/META-INF/license/*
licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
from apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar. Thus, I can't look at the
specific problem.
I can't see where jboss-logging is being pulled into the codebase (can't
find the dependency). I am assuming that it must be pulling it in somewhere
in order to add the corresponding license file. Any thoughts on this one?
2.) apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
Not sure why the org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.* files are appearing.
They are under the openjdk license, GPL v2, which is not allowed by Apache.
The org.openjdk.jmh is marked as a 'provided' dependency in the pom (recall
that there was a thread on what to do with this and the conclusion was to
leave it in as provided as do other projects). Not sure why it would be
showing up here. Should we mark it as 'runtime' instead of 'provided'?
(asking before I take the time to try it out bc folks may already know how
best to handle it).
3.) LICENSE and NOTICE files - It seems that you are suggesting that we
manually append all of the dependency notices to our NOTICE file. Correct?
It also appears that we also need to do the same with the LICENSE file:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses
So, not done yet... I will rollback once we figure out what's going on (so
that folks can still access the artifacts).
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for the feedback. Tim.
>
> See my comments inline below.
>
> @Ellison lets rollback the release.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> > >
> > > The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> > Wednesday
> > > ,
> > > August 16, 2016.
> > >
> > > The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> > > org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> > > pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> > >
> > > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> > 0.1.0'.
> > > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> > /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> > >
> > > The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> > >
> > > Please vote accordingly:
> > >
> > > [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > > [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > > [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > Ellison Anne
> > >
> >
> > Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
> >
> > Looking at the files in that directory...
> >
> > (1) Principal release artefact:
> > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> > - sig & sums check ok.
> > - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> > - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> > - Notice, License files ok.
> > - RAT checks pass.
> >
> > (2) JavaDocs:
> > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> > - sig and sums check ok.
> > - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > - JavaDocs render ok.
> >
> > (3) Maven pom file:
> > - sig and sums check ok.
> > - references to license and notices ok.
> > - not checked building with it, but oking
> > as minimal diff with project pom.
> >
> > (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> > - sig and sums check ok.
> > - not tested
> > ** notices and license files confusion.
> > ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
> >
> > jar contains
> > /LICENSE-junit.txt
> > JUnit license
> > /LICENSE.txt
> > BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> > /license/*
> > contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
> > /META-INF/LICENSE
> > ALv2
> > /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> > ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
> > /META-INF/license/*
> > licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> > LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> > /META-INF/NOTICE
> > Pirk (only) notice file.
> > /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> > Commons Math notice file.
> >
> > (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> > - sig and sums check ok.
> > - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > - Contains JMH generated source code
> > org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> > org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> > ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> > ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
> > - Not tried compiling / further testing.
> >
> > (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> > apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> > - sig and sums check ok.
> > - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> > - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> > - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> > - No further testing.
> >
> >
> > I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
> > identified in (4) and possibly (5).
> >
> > Notably:
> > (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
> > this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
> > should be removed.
> >
> > (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
> > dependencies as required by their terms.
> >
>
> Definitely needs to be fixed.
>
>
> >
> > Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are redistributing
> > them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
> > NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
> > complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
> >
> > (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and exclude
> > them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
> >
>
> These are being excluded from generated binary jar, guess they need to be
> excluded from the sources jar too.
>
> >
> > [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> > [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
> >
> >
> > p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
> > resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
> > may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
> >
>
> Agree, I guess the reason we are even creating that uber artifact could be
> for Hadoop jobs.
> Let's drop it from this release and definitely fix it for the next.
>
> Just a thought.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tim
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org>.
Thanks for the feedback. Tim.
See my comments inline below.
@Ellison lets rollback the release.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 7:35 AM, Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
> >
> > The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on
> Wednesday
> > ,
> > August 16, 2016.
> >
> > The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> > org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> > pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
> >
> > All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
> 0.1.0'.
> > You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira
> /browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> > project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
> >
> > The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
> >
> > Please vote accordingly:
> >
> > [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> > [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> > [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Ellison Anne
> >
>
> Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
>
> Looking at the files in that directory...
>
> (1) Principal release artefact:
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> - sig & sums check ok.
> - EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
> - build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
> - Notice, License files ok.
> - RAT checks pass.
>
> (2) JavaDocs:
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> - JavaDocs render ok.
>
> (3) Maven pom file:
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - references to license and notices ok.
> - not checked building with it, but oking
> as minimal diff with project pom.
>
> (4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - not tested
> ** notices and license files confusion.
> ** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
>
> jar contains
> /LICENSE-junit.txt
> JUnit license
> /LICENSE.txt
> BSD license (from Hamcrest)
> /license/*
> contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
> /META-INF/LICENSE
> ALv2
> /META-INF/LICENSE.txt
> ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
> /META-INF/license/*
> licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
> LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
> /META-INF/NOTICE
> Pirk (only) notice file.
> /META-INF/NOTICE.txt
> Commons Math notice file.
>
> (5) Pirk-only Source JAR
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> - Contains JMH generated source code
> org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
> org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
> ** Are we clear on the license for these files?
> ** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
> - Not tried compiling / further testing.
>
> (6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
> apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
> - sig and sums check ok.
> - Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
> - FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
> - FYI contains a subset of test material.
> - No further testing.
>
>
> I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
> identified in (4) and possibly (5).
>
> Notably:
> (i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
> this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
> should be removed.
>
> (ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
> dependencies as required by their terms.
>
Definitely needs to be fixed.
>
> Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are redistributing
> them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
> NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
> complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
>
> (iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and exclude
> them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
>
These are being excluded from generated binary jar, guess they need to be
excluded from the sources jar too.
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
> [2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
>
>
> p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
> resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
> may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
>
Agree, I guess the reason we are even creating that uber artifact could be
for Hadoop jobs.
Let's drop it from this release and definitely fix it for the next.
Just a thought.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
Re: [VOTE] - Pirk 0.1.0 Release
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
On 14/08/16 04:19, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is the vote for release 0.1.0 of Apache Pirk (incubating).
>
> The vote will be going for at least 72 hours and will be closed on Wednesday
> ,
> August 16, 2016.
>
> The artifacts can be downloaded here: https://repository.apache.
> org/content/repositories/orgapachepirk-1001/org/apache/
> pirk/apache-pirk/0.1.0-incubating/
>
> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion = 0.1.0'.
> You can view them here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIRK-47?jql=
> project%20%3D%20PIRK%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D0.1.0
>
> The artifacts have been signed with Key : 1FD8849B
>
> Please vote accordingly:
>
> [ ] +1, accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release
> [ ] +0, I don't care either way,
> [ ] -1, do not accept RC as the official 0.1.0 release because...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ellison Anne
>
Wow, you guys have had a busy weekend.
Looking at the files in that directory...
(1) Principal release artefact:
apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
- sig & sums check ok.
- EAW's pub key is in LDAP, KEYS file, etc.
- build and test ok on Oracle Java 8b91, RHEL6.
- Notice, License files ok.
- RAT checks pass.
(2) JavaDocs:
apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-javadoc.jar
- sig and sums check ok.
- Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
- JavaDocs render ok.
(3) Maven pom file:
- sig and sums check ok.
- references to license and notices ok.
- not checked building with it, but oking
as minimal diff with project pom.
(4) Dependency combined binary convenience:
apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-exe.jar
- sig and sums check ok.
- not tested
** notices and license files confusion.
** not passing on notices for included dependencies.
jar contains
/LICENSE-junit.txt
JUnit license
/LICENSE.txt
BSD license (from Hamcrest)
/license/*
contains ALv2, and other license and NOTICE file for XML APIs.
/META-INF/LICENSE
ALv2
/META-INF/LICENSE.txt
ALv2 (with reference to org.apache.commons.math3.ml.neuralnet)
/META-INF/license/*
licenses for a variety of dependencies, including
LICENSE.jboss-logging.txt -> LGPLv2
/META-INF/NOTICE
Pirk (only) notice file.
/META-INF/NOTICE.txt
Commons Math notice file.
(5) Pirk-only Source JAR
apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating-sources.jar
- sig and sums check ok.
- Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
- Contains JMH generated source code
org.apache.pirk.benchmark.generated.*
org.openjdk.jmh.infra.generated.*
** Are we clear on the license for these files?
** Fails RAT checks due to unspecified licenses on these files.
- Not tried compiling / further testing.
(6) Pirk-only Binary JAR
apache-pirk-0.1.0-incubating.jar
- sig and sums check ok.
- Notice and Licence files ok (in META-INF/).
- FYI contains an empty directory (/org/openjdk/).
- FYI contains a subset of test material.
- No further testing.
I have to vote -1 (binding) on these artefacts due to the issues
identified in (4) and possibly (5).
Notably:
(i) we indicate there is LGPLv2.1 material in this release. If true
this is contrary to ASF's policy [1], if not then the license text
should be removed.
(ii) we are not passing through the required NOTICES for Pirk's
dependencies as required by their terms.
Pirk's transitive JAR has deep dependencies, so if we are redistributing
them we must include their notice files too. Our JAR has a number of
NOTICE files, but they are not comprehensive. Better to have a single
complete NOTICE file, e.g. [2].
(iii) we should clarify the licence of generated JMH files, and exclude
them for the RAT check or remove them from the artefacts as required.
[1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x
[2] https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE
p.s. I appreciate that (4) is potentially a significant effort to
resolve, but the convenience JAR is not essential to a release, so we
may consider dropping that from the release artefacts this time round.
Just a thought.
Regards,
Tim