You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pagespeed.apache.org by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com> on 2019/09/11 21:22:19 UTC
[VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Hi all,
Raising a vote for accepting the mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
for release, staged at:
http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
incubator general list for approval.
For those who want context on the release procedure:
https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
Otto
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
Indeed, I misunderstood.. in that case, I think we can call this VOTE and
have enough ppmc +1's to proceed! So we raise another vote general@.. Jukka
wdyt, does that sound right?
Otto
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 11:49 PM Justin Mclean <jm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The normal process is first voting here on the dev list and getting 3 +1
> votes from your PPMC, then asking the wider incubator to vote on general@.
> It's nice if your mentors vote (as they are IPMC members) but that's not
> required. [1]
>
> I noticed you mentioned this in your incubator report, but I think there
> may be a misunderstanding how the process works.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1. https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#releases
>
>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Justin Mclean <jm...@apache.org>.
Hi,
The normal process is first voting here on the dev list and getting 3 +1 votes from your PPMC, then asking the wider incubator to vote on general@. It's nice if your mentors vote (as they are IPMC members) but that's not required. [1]
I noticed you mentioned this in your incubator report, but I think there may be a misunderstanding how the process works.
Thanks,
Justin
1. https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#releases
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, looks good to me! +1'd
+Leif +Nick +Phil; can you take a look at the RC? We need two more IPMC
votes on this.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 9:57 AM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> Rather late then never they say, but I made amendments accordingly:
> - added a SHA512 checksum & KEYS file
> - updated http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc3/ to
> mention "incubating" in all the artifact file names.
>
> Otto
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:42 AM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Otto,
>>
>> Sorry for my delay on the VOTE thread. I gave a deeper look at the RC and
>> I'm ready to +1 the release.
>>
>> The only bit missing seems to be a KEYS file with an export of your
>> public key and a SHA512 checksum of the release tarball. See
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html for details. No need to
>> re-roll the tarball, just add them as extra files.
>>
>> Also please rename the rc to include "incubating" in the file name. See
>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#podling_constraints for
>> details.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jukka
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:58 AM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I gave a quick look and everything seems fine. Thanks for the tweaks I
>>> asked for!
>>>
>>> I think we can start a new VOTE thread and I'll do a deeper review over
>>> the weekend.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Jukka
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:33 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> (if the source tarball looks good, I'll go ahead and tag the release,
>>>> plus produce the optional rpm/debs for the release)
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:59 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> et voila:
>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc3/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds good! Can you share the RC for a preview before starting the
>>>>>> VOTE thread?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 4:01 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (@jukka, if you think so too, I propose spinning up the release
>>>>>>> process to produce another RC, based on the modified build scripts,
>>>>>>> and re-raise the VOTE?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:49 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect
>>>>>>>> to licenses.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also
>>>>>>>>> myself before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>>>>>>>>>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I
>>>>>>>>>> could find in the dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>>>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory
>>>>>>>>>>> header between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Done
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright
>>>>>>>>>>> notices and license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the
>>>>>>>>>>> terms and conditions of the following licenses:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the
>>>>>>>>>>> policy in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any
>>>>>>>>>> violations back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>>>>>>>>>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>>>>>>>>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>>>>>>>>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much
>>>>>>>>>>> detail. As a general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE
>>>>>>>>>>> probably shouldn't be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not
>>>>>>>>>>> explicitly required to be in the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for
>>>>>>>>>>> details. Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks
>>>>>>>>>>> like the following might be sufficient for us:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>>>>>>>>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This product includes software developed at
>>>>>>>>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>>>>>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would
>>>>>>>>>>>> look like:
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I left out Apache licensenced deps
>>>>>>>>>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other
>>>>>>>>>>>> dependency which was
>>>>>>>>>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the
>>>>>>>>>>>> right thing here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <
>>>>>>>>>>>> lofesa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> review on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Otto
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
Rather late then never they say, but I made amendments accordingly:
- added a SHA512 checksum & KEYS file
- updated http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc3/ to
mention "incubating" in all the artifact file names.
Otto
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 9:42 AM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Otto,
>
> Sorry for my delay on the VOTE thread. I gave a deeper look at the RC and
> I'm ready to +1 the release.
>
> The only bit missing seems to be a KEYS file with an export of your public
> key and a SHA512 checksum of the release tarball. See
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html for details. No need to
> re-roll the tarball, just add them as extra files.
>
> Also please rename the rc to include "incubating" in the file name. See
> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#podling_constraints for
> details.
>
> Best,
>
> Jukka
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:58 AM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I gave a quick look and everything seems fine. Thanks for the tweaks I
>> asked for!
>>
>> I think we can start a new VOTE thread and I'll do a deeper review over
>> the weekend.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jukka
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:33 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> (if the source tarball looks good, I'll go ahead and tag the release,
>>> plus produce the optional rpm/debs for the release)
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:59 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> et voila:
>>>> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc3/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sounds good! Can you share the RC for a preview before starting the
>>>>> VOTE thread?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 4:01 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> (@jukka, if you think so too, I propose spinning up the release
>>>>>> process to produce another RC, based on the modified build scripts,
>>>>>> and re-raise the VOTE?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:49 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect to
>>>>>>> licenses.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also
>>>>>>>> myself before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>>>>>>>>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I
>>>>>>>>> could find in the dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory
>>>>>>>>>> header between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Done
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices
>>>>>>>>>> and license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>>>>>>>>>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the
>>>>>>>>>> policy in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any
>>>>>>>>> violations back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>>>>>>>>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>>>>>>>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>>>>>>>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much
>>>>>>>>>> detail. As a general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE
>>>>>>>>>> probably shouldn't be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not
>>>>>>>>>> explicitly required to be in the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for
>>>>>>>>>> details. Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks
>>>>>>>>>> like the following might be sufficient for us:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>>>>>>>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This product includes software developed at
>>>>>>>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>>>>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would
>>>>>>>>>>> look like:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I
>>>>>>>>>>> left out Apache licensenced deps
>>>>>>>>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other
>>>>>>>>>>> dependency which was
>>>>>>>>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the
>>>>>>>>>>> right thing here.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <
>>>>>>>>>>> lofesa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>>>>>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>>>>>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review
>>>>>>>>>>>> on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>>>>>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>> > Otto
>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi Otto,
Sorry for my delay on the VOTE thread. I gave a deeper look at the RC and
I'm ready to +1 the release.
The only bit missing seems to be a KEYS file with an export of your public
key and a SHA512 checksum of the release tarball. See
http://www.apache.org/dev/release-signing.html for details. No need to
re-roll the tarball, just add them as extra files.
Also please rename the rc to include "incubating" in the file name. See
http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#podling_constraints
for
details.
Best,
Jukka
On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 10:58 AM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I gave a quick look and everything seems fine. Thanks for the tweaks I
> asked for!
>
> I think we can start a new VOTE thread and I'll do a deeper review over
> the weekend.
>
> Best,
>
> Jukka
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:33 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
>> (if the source tarball looks good, I'll go ahead and tag the release,
>> plus produce the optional rpm/debs for the release)
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:59 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> et voila:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc3/
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sounds good! Can you share the RC for a preview before starting the
>>>> VOTE thread?
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 4:01 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> (@jukka, if you think so too, I propose spinning up the release
>>>>> process to produce another RC, based on the modified build scripts,
>>>>> and re-raise the VOTE?)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:49 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect to
>>>>>> licenses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also
>>>>>>> myself before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>>>>>>>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I
>>>>>>>> could find in the dependencies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory
>>>>>>>>> header between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Done
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices
>>>>>>>>> and license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>>>>>>>>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the
>>>>>>>>> policy in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any
>>>>>>>> violations back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>>>>>>>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>>>>>>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>>>>>>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail.
>>>>>>>>> As a general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably
>>>>>>>>> shouldn't be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly
>>>>>>>>> required to be in the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for
>>>>>>>>> details. Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks
>>>>>>>>> like the following might be sufficient for us:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>>>>>>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This product includes software developed at
>>>>>>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>>>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look
>>>>>>>>>> like:
>>>>>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>>>>>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I
>>>>>>>>>> left out Apache licensenced deps
>>>>>>>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other
>>>>>>>>>> dependency which was
>>>>>>>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the
>>>>>>>>>> right thing here.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <
>>>>>>>>>> lofesa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>>>>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>>>>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>>>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review
>>>>>>>>>>> on the
>>>>>>>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>>>>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > Otto
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I gave a quick look and everything seems fine. Thanks for the tweaks I
asked for!
I think we can start a new VOTE thread and I'll do a deeper review over the
weekend.
Best,
Jukka
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 1:33 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> (if the source tarball looks good, I'll go ahead and tag the release, plus
> produce the optional rpm/debs for the release)
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:59 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
>> et voila:
>> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc3/
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds good! Can you share the RC for a preview before starting the VOTE
>>> thread?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 4:01 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> (@jukka, if you think so too, I propose spinning up the release process
>>>> to produce another RC, based on the modified build scripts,
>>>> and re-raise the VOTE?)
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:49 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect to
>>>>> licenses.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also myself
>>>>>> before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>>>>>>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I
>>>>>>> could find in the dependencies.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory
>>>>>>>> header between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Done
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices
>>>>>>>> and license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>>>>>>>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the
>>>>>>>> policy in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any
>>>>>>> violations back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>>>>>>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>>>>>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>>>>>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail.
>>>>>>>> As a general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably
>>>>>>>> shouldn't be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly
>>>>>>>> required to be in the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for
>>>>>>>> details. Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks
>>>>>>>> like the following might be sufficient for us:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>>>>>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This product includes software developed at
>>>>>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look
>>>>>>>>> like:
>>>>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>>>>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I
>>>>>>>>> left out Apache licensenced deps
>>>>>>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other
>>>>>>>>> dependency which was
>>>>>>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the
>>>>>>>>> right thing here.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <
>>>>>>>>> lofesa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>>>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>>>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review
>>>>>>>>>> on the
>>>>>>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>>>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Otto
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
(if the source tarball looks good, I'll go ahead and tag the release, plus
produce the optional rpm/debs for the release)
On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:59 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> et voila:
> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc3/
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sounds good! Can you share the RC for a preview before starting the VOTE
>> thread?
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 4:01 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> (@jukka, if you think so too, I propose spinning up the release process
>>> to produce another RC, based on the modified build scripts,
>>> and re-raise the VOTE?)
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:49 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect to
>>>> licenses.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also myself
>>>>> before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>>>>>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I could
>>>>>> find in the dependencies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <
>>>>>> jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory
>>>>>>> header between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Done
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices
>>>>>>> and license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>>>>>>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the
>>>>>>> policy in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any
>>>>>> violations back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>>>>>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>>>>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>>>>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail.
>>>>>>> As a general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably
>>>>>>> shouldn't be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly
>>>>>>> required to be in the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for
>>>>>>> details. Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks
>>>>>>> like the following might be sufficient for us:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>>>>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This product includes software developed at
>>>>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look
>>>>>>>> like:
>>>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>>>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I
>>>>>>>> left out Apache licensenced deps
>>>>>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other
>>>>>>>> dependency which was
>>>>>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right
>>>>>>>> thing here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <
>>>>>>>> lofesa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Otto
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
et voila:
http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc3/
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 3:02 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Sounds good! Can you share the RC for a preview before starting the VOTE
> thread?
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 4:01 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
>> (@jukka, if you think so too, I propose spinning up the release process
>> to produce another RC, based on the modified build scripts,
>> and re-raise the VOTE?)
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:49 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect to
>>> licenses.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also myself
>>>> before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>>>>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I could
>>>>> find in the dependencies.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory
>>>>>> header between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Done
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices and
>>>>>> license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>>>>>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the
>>>>>> policy in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any
>>>>> violations back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>>>>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>>>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>>>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail. As
>>>>>> a general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably
>>>>>> shouldn't be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly
>>>>>> required to be in the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for
>>>>>> details. Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks
>>>>>> like the following might be sufficient for us:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>>>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This product includes software developed at
>>>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>>>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look
>>>>>>> like:
>>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I
>>>>>>> left out Apache licensenced deps
>>>>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other
>>>>>>> dependency which was
>>>>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right
>>>>>>> thing here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Otto
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Sounds good! Can you share the RC for a preview before starting the VOTE
thread?
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 4:01 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> (@jukka, if you think so too, I propose spinning up the release process to
> produce another RC, based on the modified build scripts,
> and re-raise the VOTE?)
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:49 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
>> So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect to
>> licenses.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also myself
>>> before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>>>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I could
>>>> find in the dependencies.
>>>>
>>>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory
>>>>> header between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Done
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices and
>>>>> license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>>>>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the policy
>>>>> in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any violations
>>>> back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>>>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>>>
>>>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail. As
>>>>> a general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably
>>>>> shouldn't be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly
>>>>> required to be in the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for
>>>>> details. Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks
>>>>> like the following might be sufficient for us:
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>>
>>>>> This product includes software developed at
>>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>>>
>>>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look
>>>>>> like:
>>>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I left
>>>>>> out Apache licensenced deps
>>>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other dependency
>>>>>> which was
>>>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right
>>>>>> thing here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Otto
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
(@jukka, if you think so too, I propose spinning up the release process to
produce another RC, based on the modified build scripts,
and re-raise the VOTE?)
On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 9:49 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect to
> licenses.
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also myself
>> before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I could
>>> find in the dependencies.
>>>
>>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory header
>>>> between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>>
>>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Done
>>>
>>>
>>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices and
>>>> license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>>>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the policy
>>>> in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any violations
>>> back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>>
>>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail. As a
>>>> general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably shouldn't
>>>> be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly required to be in
>>>> the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for details.
>>>> Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks like the
>>>> following might be sufficient for us:
>>>>
>>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>>
>>>> This product includes software developed at
>>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>>
>>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <
>>>> oschaaf@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look like:
>>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I left
>>>>> out Apache licensenced deps
>>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other dependency
>>>>> which was
>>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right
>>>>> thing here.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
>>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Otto
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
So I had another look, and I think we are still good with respect to
licenses.
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:57 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also myself
> before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
>> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I could
>> find in the dependencies.
>>
>> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory header
>>> between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>>
>>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>>
>>>
>> Done
>>
>>
>>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices and
>>> license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>>
>>>
>>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the policy
>>> in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>>
>>
>> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any violations
>> back then. I don't think anything relevant has
>> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>>
>>
>>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should
>>> double-check whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged
>>> into the top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>>
>>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail. As a
>>> general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably shouldn't
>>> be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly required to be in
>>> the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for details.
>>> Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks like the
>>> following might be sufficient for us:
>>>
>>> Apache PageSpeed
>>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>>
>>> This product includes software developed at
>>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>>
>>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look like:
>>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I left
>>>> out Apache licensenced deps
>>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other dependency
>>>> which was
>>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>>
>>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right
>>>> thing here.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > Hi all,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>>> >
>>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
>>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Otto
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Sounds good, thanks! I'll go through the list of licenses also myself
before +1'ing on the VOTE thread.
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 4:40 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
> Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I could find
> in the dependencies.
>
> I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory header
>> between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>>
>> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>>
>>
> Done
>
>
>> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices and
>> license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
>> conditions of the following licenses:
>>
>>
>> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the policy in
>> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>>
>
> I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any violations
> back then. I don't think anything relevant has
> changed meantime, but let me double check.
>
>
>> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should double-check
>> whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged into the
>> top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>>
>> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail. As a
>> general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably shouldn't
>> be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly required to be in
>> the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for details.
>> Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks like the
>> following might be sufficient for us:
>>
>> Apache PageSpeed
>> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>>
>> This product includes software developed at
>> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>>
>> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
>> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look like:
>>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I left
>>> out Apache licensenced deps
>>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other dependency
>>> which was
>>> licensed otherwise.
>>>
>>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>>
>>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right
>>> thing here.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Hi all,
>>>> >
>>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>>> > for release, staged at:
>>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>>> >
>>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
>>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>>> >
>>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>>> >
>>>> > Otto
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
I created a PR addressing the license/notice issues:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1955
Notice did become a little elaborate, I bubbled up everything I could find
in the dependencies.
I'll now look into moving the sources in the tarball up one level.
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:23 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory header
> between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
>
> MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
>
>
Done
> mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices and
> license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
> conditions of the following licenses:
>
>
> Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the policy in
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
>
I think I checked that in the past, yes, I couldn't find any violations
back then. I don't think anything relevant has
changed meantime, but let me double check.
> Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should double-check
> whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged into the
> top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
>
> In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail. As a
> general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably shouldn't
> be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly required to be in
> the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for details.
> Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks like the
> following might be sufficient for us:
>
> Apache PageSpeed
> Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> This product includes software developed at
> The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
>
> Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
> Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
>> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>>
>> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look like:
>> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
>> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I left out
>> Apache licensenced deps
>> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other dependency
>> which was
>> licensed otherwise.
>>
>> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>>
>> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right thing
>> here.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com> wrote:
>>> > Hi all,
>>> >
>>> > Raising a vote for accepting the
>>> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>>> > for release, staged at:
>>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>>> >
>>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
>>> > incubator general list for approval.
>>> >
>>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>>> >
>>> > Otto
>>> >
>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Looks good, thanks! The only addition I'd make is an explanatory header
between the ASL and the other licenses. Something like this:
MOD_PAGESPEED SUBCOMPONENTS
mod_pagespeed includes components with separate copyright notices and
license terms. Your use of these components is subject to the terms and
conditions of the following licenses:
Have we checked that all the 3rd party licenses fall within the policy in
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html?
Excluding the Apache-licensed deps is fine, though we should double-check
whether any of them have NOTICE files that should be merged into the
top-level mod_pagespeed NOTICE.
In general it looks like our NOTICE file includes too much detail. As a
general rule anything that's already included in LICENSE probably shouldn't
be covered in NOTICE. And something that's not explicitly required to be in
the NOTICE should generally be left out. See
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice for details.
Based on a quick reading (to be verified in more detail), it looks like the
following might be sufficient for us:
Apache PageSpeed
Copyright 2018-2019 The Apache Software Foundation
This product includes software developed at
The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/).
Codebase originally donated by Google Inc:
Copyright (C) 2010-2017 Google Inc.
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 10:08 AM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> @Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
>
> As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look like:
> https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
> Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I left out
> Apache licensenced deps
> like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other dependency
> which was
> licensed otherwise.
>
> There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
>
> It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right thing
> here.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > Raising a vote for accepting the mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
>> > for release, staged at:
>> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>> >
>> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
>> > incubator general list for approval.
>> >
>> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
>> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>> >
>> > Otto
>> >
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
@Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
As a first step, I'm proposing up update LICENSE so it would look like:
https://gist.github.com/oschaaf/09458d082cf767fb24353a82cb3b4ae9
Indeed, dependencies where missing in there, nice catch. Note: I left out
Apache licensenced deps
like apr and serf, is that OK? I tried to list every other dependency which
was
licensed otherwise.
There's also our NOTICE which would be good to double check:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/blob/master/NOTICE
It would be really grateful if someone could verify I did the right thing
here.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 10:10 PM Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Raising a vote for accepting the mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> > for release, staged at:
> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
> >
> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
> > incubator general list for approval.
> >
> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
> >
> > Otto
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Longinos Ferrando <lo...@gmail.com>.
+1
On 2019/09/11 21:22:19, Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Raising a vote for accepting the mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> for release, staged at:
> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>
> We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
> incubator general list for approval.
>
> For those who want context on the release procedure:
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>
> Otto
>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
+1
SHA512 checksum
mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2:
B6B39BC0 13E19E99 4808DF8A 037473F5 D1A67EBE 71EA8E88 6B763B44 EC9BFCE4
883D1DAF
B322EA09 1A69D001 24B2D4D5 41CF5076 3DD8ECB5 FA0DA034 808E5CB4
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:26 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> +1 from me obviously :-)
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Joshua Marantz
> <jm...@google.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:22 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Raising a vote for accepting the
> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> > > for release, staged at:
> > > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
> > >
> > > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
> > > incubator general list for approval.
> > >
> > > For those who want context on the release procedure:
> > > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
> > >
> > > Otto
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
+1, let's not derail the current release on this.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 12:55 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> There is a work-in-progress to make a move to bazel & absl [1].
> Bazel manages dependencies for us there, instead of git, but after
> looking into it for a little bit I'm not sure that would make it easier to
> transit towards a release process based on git-archive.
>
> Regardless, talking to Josh, we'd both like to do one more release based on
> the current
> release-process, because a) the bazel work needs some more tuning
> to get it shippable .. and b) the current release process has more
> safe-guards
> to ensure quality in-place (the bazel branch doesn't have the system
> tests / release process / packaging wired up yet.. though unit-tests are
> passing).
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1948
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:29 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Great, thanks for the pointer!
> >
> > Not necessary for this release, but would it make sense to consider
> > releasing simply a git-archive of the release tag? I suppose the use of
> > submodules would make this non-trivial.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 11:13 AM Otto van der Schaaf <oschaaf@we-amp.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for having a look!
> > >
> > > The process for getting to a source tarball is described here:
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/wiki/Release-Process#building-the-source-tarball
> > >
> > > I'll take a look at the things you pointed out, and create another one
> to
> > > address those.
> > >
> > > Otto
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:03 PM Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Awesome, thanks for putting up the release candidate and sorry for
> the
> > > late
> > > > response!
> > > >
> > > > I'm looking at it now, and will post more detailed notes later today.
> > > That
> > > > said, a few immediate observations/questions:
> > > >
> > > > - It would be good for files like README, LICENSE, etc. to be at
> the
> > > top
> > > > level of the source tarball. Do we need the src/ directory, or
> could
> > > > everything just be one level higher in the tarball?
> > > >
> > > > - The README doesn't tell me how to build or install the package.
> > > >
> > > > - Are all the third_party licenses reflected or referenced in the
> > > > top-level LICENSE? A quick spot check showed that at least the RE2
> > > > license
> > > > is missing.
> > > >
> > > > - Is there a corresponding tag in the Git repository? How was the
> > > > tarball generated from the version controlled sources? I notice
> that
> > > at
> > > > least the devel and html subdirectories are excluded.
> > > >
> > > > PS. I branched the topic to [DISCUSS] to avoid polluting the vote
> > thread.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > Jukka
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:26 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
> > oschaaf@we-amp.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1 from me obviously :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Joshua Marantz
> > > > > <jm...@google.com.invalid>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +1
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:22 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
> > > > oschaaf@we-amp.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Raising a vote for accepting the
> > > > > mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> > > > > > > for release, staged at:
> > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review
> on
> > > the
> > > > > > > incubator general list for approval.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For those who want context on the release procedure:
> > > > > > > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Otto
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
There is a work-in-progress to make a move to bazel & absl [1].
Bazel manages dependencies for us there, instead of git, but after
looking into it for a little bit I'm not sure that would make it easier to
transit towards a release process based on git-archive.
Regardless, talking to Josh, we'd both like to do one more release based on
the current
release-process, because a) the bazel work needs some more tuning
to get it shippable .. and b) the current release process has more
safe-guards
to ensure quality in-place (the bazel branch doesn't have the system
tests / release process / packaging wired up yet.. though unit-tests are
passing).
[1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/pull/1948
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:29 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Great, thanks for the pointer!
>
> Not necessary for this release, but would it make sense to consider
> releasing simply a git-archive of the release tag? I suppose the use of
> submodules would make this non-trivial.
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 11:13 AM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for having a look!
> >
> > The process for getting to a source tarball is described here:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/wiki/Release-Process#building-the-source-tarball
> >
> > I'll take a look at the things you pointed out, and create another one to
> > address those.
> >
> > Otto
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:03 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Awesome, thanks for putting up the release candidate and sorry for the
> > late
> > > response!
> > >
> > > I'm looking at it now, and will post more detailed notes later today.
> > That
> > > said, a few immediate observations/questions:
> > >
> > > - It would be good for files like README, LICENSE, etc. to be at the
> > top
> > > level of the source tarball. Do we need the src/ directory, or could
> > > everything just be one level higher in the tarball?
> > >
> > > - The README doesn't tell me how to build or install the package.
> > >
> > > - Are all the third_party licenses reflected or referenced in the
> > > top-level LICENSE? A quick spot check showed that at least the RE2
> > > license
> > > is missing.
> > >
> > > - Is there a corresponding tag in the Git repository? How was the
> > > tarball generated from the version controlled sources? I notice that
> > at
> > > least the devel and html subdirectories are excluded.
> > >
> > > PS. I branched the topic to [DISCUSS] to avoid polluting the vote
> thread.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Jukka
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:26 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
> oschaaf@we-amp.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 from me obviously :-)
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Joshua Marantz
> > > > <jm...@google.com.invalid>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:22 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
> > > oschaaf@we-amp.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Raising a vote for accepting the
> > > > mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> > > > > > for release, staged at:
> > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on
> > the
> > > > > > incubator general list for approval.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For those who want context on the release procedure:
> > > > > > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Otto
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Great, thanks for the pointer!
Not necessary for this release, but would it make sense to consider
releasing simply a git-archive of the release tag? I suppose the use of
submodules would make this non-trivial.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 11:13 AM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> Thanks for having a look!
>
> The process for getting to a source tarball is described here:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/wiki/Release-Process#building-the-source-tarball
>
> I'll take a look at the things you pointed out, and create another one to
> address those.
>
> Otto
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:03 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Awesome, thanks for putting up the release candidate and sorry for the
> late
> > response!
> >
> > I'm looking at it now, and will post more detailed notes later today.
> That
> > said, a few immediate observations/questions:
> >
> > - It would be good for files like README, LICENSE, etc. to be at the
> top
> > level of the source tarball. Do we need the src/ directory, or could
> > everything just be one level higher in the tarball?
> >
> > - The README doesn't tell me how to build or install the package.
> >
> > - Are all the third_party licenses reflected or referenced in the
> > top-level LICENSE? A quick spot check showed that at least the RE2
> > license
> > is missing.
> >
> > - Is there a corresponding tag in the Git repository? How was the
> > tarball generated from the version controlled sources? I notice that
> at
> > least the devel and html subdirectories are excluded.
> >
> > PS. I branched the topic to [DISCUSS] to avoid polluting the vote thread.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jukka
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:26 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 from me obviously :-)
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Joshua Marantz
> > > <jm...@google.com.invalid>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:22 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
> > oschaaf@we-amp.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Raising a vote for accepting the
> > > mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> > > > > for release, staged at:
> > > > > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
> > > > >
> > > > > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on
> the
> > > > > incubator general list for approval.
> > > > >
> > > > > For those who want context on the release procedure:
> > > > > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Otto
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
Thanks for having a look!
The process for getting to a source tarball is described here:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-pagespeed-mod/wiki/Release-Process#building-the-source-tarball
I'll take a look at the things you pointed out, and create another one to
address those.
Otto
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 5:03 PM Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Awesome, thanks for putting up the release candidate and sorry for the late
> response!
>
> I'm looking at it now, and will post more detailed notes later today. That
> said, a few immediate observations/questions:
>
> - It would be good for files like README, LICENSE, etc. to be at the top
> level of the source tarball. Do we need the src/ directory, or could
> everything just be one level higher in the tarball?
>
> - The README doesn't tell me how to build or install the package.
>
> - Are all the third_party licenses reflected or referenced in the
> top-level LICENSE? A quick spot check showed that at least the RE2
> license
> is missing.
>
> - Is there a corresponding tag in the Git repository? How was the
> tarball generated from the version controlled sources? I notice that at
> least the devel and html subdirectories are excluded.
>
> PS. I branched the topic to [DISCUSS] to avoid polluting the vote thread.
>
> Best,
>
> Jukka
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:26 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 from me obviously :-)
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Joshua Marantz
> > <jm...@google.com.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:22 PM Otto van der Schaaf <
> oschaaf@we-amp.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Raising a vote for accepting the
> > mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> > > > for release, staged at:
> > > > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
> > > >
> > > > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
> > > > incubator general list for approval.
> > > >
> > > > For those who want context on the release procedure:
> > > > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
> > > >
> > > > Otto
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
[DISCUSS] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
Awesome, thanks for putting up the release candidate and sorry for the late
response!
I'm looking at it now, and will post more detailed notes later today. That
said, a few immediate observations/questions:
- It would be good for files like README, LICENSE, etc. to be at the top
level of the source tarball. Do we need the src/ directory, or could
everything just be one level higher in the tarball?
- The README doesn't tell me how to build or install the package.
- Are all the third_party licenses reflected or referenced in the
top-level LICENSE? A quick spot check showed that at least the RE2 license
is missing.
- Is there a corresponding tag in the Git repository? How was the
tarball generated from the version controlled sources? I notice that at
least the devel and html subdirectories are excluded.
PS. I branched the topic to [DISCUSS] to avoid polluting the vote thread.
Best,
Jukka
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:26 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> +1 from me obviously :-)
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Joshua Marantz
> <jm...@google.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:22 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Raising a vote for accepting the
> mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> > > for release, staged at:
> > > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
> > >
> > > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
> > > incubator general list for approval.
> > >
> > > For those who want context on the release procedure:
> > > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
> > >
> > > Otto
> > >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>.
+1 from me obviously :-)
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:25 PM Joshua Marantz <jm...@google.com.invalid>
wrote:
> +1
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:22 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Raising a vote for accepting the mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> > for release, staged at:
> > http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
> >
> > We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
> > incubator general list for approval.
> >
> > For those who want context on the release procedure:
> > https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
> >
> > Otto
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] release mod_pagespeed 1.14.36.1
Posted by Joshua Marantz <jm...@google.com.INVALID>.
+1
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 5:22 PM Otto van der Schaaf <os...@we-amp.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Raising a vote for accepting the mod-pagespeed-beta-1.14.36.1-r0.tar.bz2
> for release, staged at:
> http://people.apache.org/~oschaaf/mod_pagespeed/1.14.36.1-rc2/
>
> We need three +1 votes to move forward and post it for review on the
> incubator general list for approval.
>
> For those who want context on the release procedure:
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html
>
> Otto
>