You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> on 2009/08/15 04:55:54 UTC
Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Apache PhotArk will be a complete open source photo gallery
application including a content repository for the images, a display
piece, an access control layer, and upload capabilities. The idea is
to have a rigid design for the content repository with a very flexible
display piece. The images in the content repository will be protected
with granular access control.
We are getting a release vote out [1], aiming getting more exposure
and attract more contributors to the community, and would appreciate
if we could get some people helping us review the release artifacts as
we are currently a very small community with only one mentor.
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00139.html
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Tim Williams<wi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have a need for something like this coming up and have been
> passively looking at PhotArk. I'd suggest that a project like this
> would do itself good by having a simple architecture diagram[1], some
> good screenshots[2], and an ounce of documentation[3]. Otherwise,
> it's tough for someone poking around to determine exactly *what* it is
> and, thus, there's not enough [on the website] to get excited about
> right now. I know, it's a small team now and sort of a catch-22. The
> blogging is good, btw, it's what reminded me of you:) Oddly enough,
> I suspect these things would be more likely to generate developer
> interest than a release would. Anyway, just an opinion...
>
> --tim
Thanks for the feedback and for the pointers, I'll try to work on some
of these necessary enhancements in the near future.
>
> [1] - Example: http://couchdb.apache.org/
> [2] - Example: http://lenya.apache.org/index/screenshots.html
> [3] - http://incubator.apache.org/photark/documentation.html
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Tim Williams <wi...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 3:59 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 08/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Based on the current active members of the community, it's then going
>>> to be hard to get this release out !!!
>>
>> If by community you mean the IPMC, then the lack of response is
>> perhaps because AFAICT there has not been a recent VOTE thread on the
>> general incubator list. [This is not a VOTE thread]
>>
>> If you are referring to the Photark podling community, then the lack
>> of activity has implications for graduation as well (there has been a
>> VOTE thread there, which should have stirred some responses).
>>
>
> It's more towards the latter, the PhotArk project is starting and his
> community is very small. While we have started some blogging/facebook
> advertisement for the podling, we are hoping to get a release out to
> get more people interested in the project.
I have a need for something like this coming up and have been
passively looking at PhotArk. I'd suggest that a project like this
would do itself good by having a simple architecture diagram[1], some
good screenshots[2], and an ounce of documentation[3]. Otherwise,
it's tough for someone poking around to determine exactly *what* it is
and, thus, there's not enough [on the website] to get excited about
right now. I know, it's a small team now and sort of a catch-22. The
blogging is good, btw, it's what reminded me of you:) Oddly enough,
I suspect these things would be more likely to generate developer
interest than a release would. Anyway, just an opinion...
--tim
[1] - Example: http://couchdb.apache.org/
[2] - Example: http://lenya.apache.org/index/screenshots.html
[3] - http://incubator.apache.org/photark/documentation.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 3:59 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Based on the current active members of the community, it's then going
>> to be hard to get this release out !!!
>
> If by community you mean the IPMC, then the lack of response is
> perhaps because AFAICT there has not been a recent VOTE thread on the
> general incubator list. [This is not a VOTE thread]
>
> If you are referring to the Photark podling community, then the lack
> of activity has implications for graduation as well (there has been a
> VOTE thread there, which should have stirred some responses).
>
It's more towards the latter, the PhotArk project is starting and his
community is very small. While we have started some blogging/facebook
advertisement for the podling, we are hoping to get a release out to
get more people interested in the project.
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 08/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 3:33 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 08/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 2:42 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On 04/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> A new RC is now available which should fix the items mentioned, please
> >> >> see details below :
> >> >
> >> > Looks OK now - the issues I raised have been fixed, thanks.
> >>
> >>
> >> This is great news, thanks for all your effort help and reviewing the
> >> rc. BTW, would you be willing to give us a +1 on the podling mailing
> >> list as we are little short in mentors.
> >
> > Sorry, I am not a podling member, so my vote would not count anyway.
> >
> > Does the podling vote need mentors?
> > Surely it just needs podling members to vote, though mentor votes would help.
> >
> > The vote is then brought to the IPMC via the general list; the release
> > can only be made if the IPMC vote succeeds.
> >
>
>
> Based on the current active members of the community, it's then going
> to be hard to get this release out !!!
If by community you mean the IPMC, then the lack of response is
perhaps because AFAICT there has not been a recent VOTE thread on the
general incubator list. [This is not a VOTE thread]
If you are referring to the Photark podling community, then the lack
of activity has implications for graduation as well (there has been a
VOTE thread there, which should have stirred some responses).
>
> --
>
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 3:33 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 2:42 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 04/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> A new RC is now available which should fix the items mentioned, please
>> >> see details below :
>> >
>> > Looks OK now - the issues I raised have been fixed, thanks.
>>
>>
>> This is great news, thanks for all your effort help and reviewing the
>> rc. BTW, would you be willing to give us a +1 on the podling mailing
>> list as we are little short in mentors.
>
> Sorry, I am not a podling member, so my vote would not count anyway.
>
> Does the podling vote need mentors?
> Surely it just needs podling members to vote, though mentor votes would help.
>
> The vote is then brought to the IPMC via the general list; the release
> can only be made if the IPMC vote succeeds.
>
Based on the current active members of the community, it's then going
to be hard to get this release out !!!
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 08/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 2:42 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 04/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> A new RC is now available which should fix the items mentioned, please
> >> see details below :
> >
> > Looks OK now - the issues I raised have been fixed, thanks.
>
>
> This is great news, thanks for all your effort help and reviewing the
> rc. BTW, would you be willing to give us a +1 on the podling mailing
> list as we are little short in mentors.
Sorry, I am not a podling member, so my vote would not count anyway.
Does the podling vote need mentors?
Surely it just needs podling members to vote, though mentor votes would help.
The vote is then brought to the IPMC via the general list; the release
can only be made if the IPMC vote succeeds.
>
> --
>
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 2:42 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> A new RC is now available which should fix the items mentioned, please
>> see details below :
>
> Looks OK now - the issues I raised have been fixed, thanks.
This is great news, thanks for all your effort help and reviewing the
rc. BTW, would you be willing to give us a +1 on the podling mailing
list as we are little short in mentors.
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 04/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A new RC is now available which should fix the items mentioned, please
> see details below :
Looks OK now - the issues I raised have been fixed, thanks.
> ---
>
>
> The artifacts are available for review at:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende/photark/M1-incubating-RC4a/
>
>
> This includes the signed binary and source distributions, the RAT report,
> and the Maven staging repository.
>
> The release tag is available at :
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/photark/tags/M1-incubating-RC4a/
>
> ---
>
> The new vote thread is :
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00150.html
>
>
> --
>
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
A new RC is now available which should fix the items mentioned, please
see details below :
---
The artifacts are available for review at:
http://people.apache.org/~lresende/photark/M1-incubating-RC4a/
This includes the signed binary and source distributions, the RAT report,
and the Maven staging repository.
The release tag is available at :
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/photark/tags/M1-incubating-RC4a/
---
The new vote thread is :
http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00150.html
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 02/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A new RC is now available, please see details below :
>
> ---
> Please review and vote on the M1-incubating release artifacts of PhotArk.
>
>
> The artifacts are available for review at:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende/photark/M1-incubating-RC4/
Sigs hashes OK; tgz and zip archives match; source archive matches with SVN tag.
However, there are some problems with the NOTICE file:
It says "This product includes/uses ...".
It is only necessary to include mentions in the NOTICE file if the
software is actually included in the release. The "/uses" part is
misleading and should be removed.
"This product includes/uses javacc (https://javacc.dev.java.net/)" - I
could find no trace of its use or inclusion.
The LICENSE file mentions "addressing-1.3.mar" which I could not find
anywhere; it's also not in the NOTICE file.
The LICENSE file does not contain a mention of
geronimo-stax-api_1.0_spec-1.0.1.jar (not blocking)
>
> This includes the signed binary and source distributions, the RAT report,
> and the Maven staging repository.
>
> The release tag is available at :
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/photark/tags/M1-incubating-RC4/
Incorrect property:
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_on.gif
> ---
>
> The new vote thread is :
>
> http://markmail.org/thread/ccvvoece354b47bw
>
>
> --
>
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
A new RC is now available, please see details below :
---
Please review and vote on the M1-incubating release artifacts of PhotArk.
The artifacts are available for review at:
http://people.apache.org/~lresende/photark/M1-incubating-RC4/
This includes the signed binary and source distributions, the RAT report,
and the Maven staging repository.
The release tag is available at :
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/photark/tags/M1-incubating-RC4/
---
The new vote thread is :
http://markmail.org/thread/ccvvoece354b47bw
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 02/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:52 AM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 02/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
>
> >> I did a cross-check to make sure only the used dependencies were
> >> mentioned in the LICENSE and got the notices sniptes from these
> >> required dependencies. Do you see a specific piece that should be
> >> removed ?
> >
> > The point is that dependencies that are used, but not actually
> > included, should not be mentioned in the NOTICE file as they do not
> > form part of the artifact.
> >
> > As it stands, the NOTICE file is confusing/misleading, and IMO should be fixed.
> >
> > I've not checked the NOTICE file entries in detail, but a quick check
> > failed to find the Axion (not Axiom) jar anywhere. Likewise Howl,
> > JDOM, DOM4j. Perhaps these are included in other libraries.
> >
>
>
> The photark-webapp.war:/WEB-INF/lib contains the following axiom jars
> that are used by some Tuscany databindings used in photArk.
>
> axiom-api-1.2.7.jar
> axiom-impl-1.2.7.jar
Sigh. The NOTICE file refers to Axion, not Axiom:
<quote>
This product includes/uses the Axion : the Open Source Java Database
(http://axion.tigris.org/)
Copyright (c) 2002-2003 Axion Development Team. All rights reserved.
</quote>
> JDOM and DOM4j and Howl were mentioned in the Tuscany notices, but it
> seems we are not using the actual dependencies.
> I'm not sure if this is really a blocker for the release, but I'll be
> fixing it on the trunk to make sure we don't have this issue in teh
> future.
>
>
> > The LICENSE file lists addressing-1.3.mar but there appears to be no such file.
> >
> > The following files in LICENSE don't agree with the contents of the
> > lib directory in the war:
> >
> > cglib-nodep-2.1_3.jar
> > geronimo-commonj_1.1_spec-1.0.jar
> >
>
>
> The photark-webapp.war:/WEB-INF/lib contains the following cglib jar
> (note that there is a version mismatch only in this case)
>
> cglib-nodep-2.2.jar
Yes, but the geronimo jar is a different jar.
>
> >> > There are no NOTICE and LICENSE files in the META-INF directory in the
> >> > war file; ideally these should be present - in this case they will be
> >> > the same as the ones in the binary archive.
> >> >
> >> > There's some inconsistency between the NOTICE files.
> >> >
> >> > The top-level NOTICE file in the binary archive says:
> >> >
> >> > Copyright (c) 2008 - 2009
> >> >
> >> > whereas the NOTICE file in the photoark-assets-M1-incubating.jar
> >> > META-INF directory says:
> >> >
> >> > Copyright (c) 2005 - 2008 The Apache Software Foundation
> >> >
> >> > The parent pom says the inception year is 2008, so the latter file looks wrong.
> >> > Seems to be an error in the NOTICE skeleton files.
> >> >
> >>
>
>
> Fixed in trunk in the assets jar.
>
>
> >>
> >> These does not seem as release blockers to me. Do you agree ?
>
>
> These are all fixed in both release branch (svn #810595) and trunk
> (svn #810601). Do you really think we need another respin or having
> these fixed in SVN are enough to get a positive vote from you ?
>
It's good that the problems are fixed in SVN, but that does not change
the release unless it is re-spun.
The NOTICE and LICENSE files are important parts of a release; IMO the
current contents of the release don't warrant a +1 from me.
>
> --
>
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:52 AM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 02/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I did a cross-check to make sure only the used dependencies were
>> mentioned in the LICENSE and got the notices sniptes from these
>> required dependencies. Do you see a specific piece that should be
>> removed ?
>
> The point is that dependencies that are used, but not actually
> included, should not be mentioned in the NOTICE file as they do not
> form part of the artifact.
>
> As it stands, the NOTICE file is confusing/misleading, and IMO should be fixed.
>
> I've not checked the NOTICE file entries in detail, but a quick check
> failed to find the Axion (not Axiom) jar anywhere. Likewise Howl,
> JDOM, DOM4j. Perhaps these are included in other libraries.
>
The photark-webapp.war:/WEB-INF/lib contains the following axiom jars
that are used by some Tuscany databindings used in photArk.
axiom-api-1.2.7.jar
axiom-impl-1.2.7.jar
JDOM and DOM4j and Howl were mentioned in the Tuscany notices, but it
seems we are not using the actual dependencies.
I'm not sure if this is really a blocker for the release, but I'll be
fixing it on the trunk to make sure we don't have this issue in teh
future.
> The LICENSE file lists addressing-1.3.mar but there appears to be no such file.
>
> The following files in LICENSE don't agree with the contents of the
> lib directory in the war:
>
> cglib-nodep-2.1_3.jar
> geronimo-commonj_1.1_spec-1.0.jar
>
The photark-webapp.war:/WEB-INF/lib contains the following cglib jar
(note that there is a version mismatch only in this case)
cglib-nodep-2.2.jar
>> > There are no NOTICE and LICENSE files in the META-INF directory in the
>> > war file; ideally these should be present - in this case they will be
>> > the same as the ones in the binary archive.
>> >
>> > There's some inconsistency between the NOTICE files.
>> >
>> > The top-level NOTICE file in the binary archive says:
>> >
>> > Copyright (c) 2008 - 2009
>> >
>> > whereas the NOTICE file in the photoark-assets-M1-incubating.jar
>> > META-INF directory says:
>> >
>> > Copyright (c) 2005 - 2008 The Apache Software Foundation
>> >
>> > The parent pom says the inception year is 2008, so the latter file looks wrong.
>> > Seems to be an error in the NOTICE skeleton files.
>> >
>>
Fixed in trunk in the assets jar.
>>
>> These does not seem as release blockers to me. Do you agree ?
These are all fixed in both release branch (svn #810595) and trunk
(svn #810601). Do you really think we need another respin or having
these fixed in SVN are enough to get a positive vote from you ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 02/09/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 3:57 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 31/08/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Thanks for all the reviews and feedback for the PhotArk RC2. I have
> >> fixed all the severe and blocking issues and have produced a new RC...
> >>
> >> Please follow the link below for the new RC details :
> >>
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00145.html
> >
> > For the benefit of other reviewers, here are the details:
> >
> > <quote>
> > The artifacts are available for review at:
> > http://people.apache.org/~lresende/photark/M1-incubating-RC3/
> >
> > This includes the signed binary and source distributions, the RAT report,
> > and the Maven staging repository.
> >
> > The release tag is available at :
> > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/photark/tags/M1-incubating-RC3/
> > </quote>
> >
> > Sigs and hashes OK. However no SHA hashes - only MD5 - are provided.
> > tgz and zip archives agree with each other. Source archives agree with SVN tag.
> >
> > SVN has one incorrect setting:
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_on.gif
> > [not a blocker]
> >
> > The binary NOTICE file has a lot of paragraphs which start:
> >
> > "This product includes/uses ..."
> >
> > The NOTICE file should only include required 3rd party notices; code
> > that is used (but not included) should not be mentioned in the NOTICE
> > file, so the /uses part and any non-included 3rd party dependencies
> > need to be removed.
> >
>
>
> I did a cross-check to make sure only the used dependencies were
> mentioned in the LICENSE and got the notices sniptes from these
> required dependencies. Do you see a specific piece that should be
> removed ?
The point is that dependencies that are used, but not actually
included, should not be mentioned in the NOTICE file as they do not
form part of the artifact.
As it stands, the NOTICE file is confusing/misleading, and IMO should be fixed.
I've not checked the NOTICE file entries in detail, but a quick check
failed to find the Axion (not Axiom) jar anywhere. Likewise Howl,
JDOM, DOM4j. Perhaps these are included in other libraries.
The LICENSE file lists addressing-1.3.mar but there appears to be no such file.
The following files in LICENSE don't agree with the contents of the
lib directory in the war:
cglib-nodep-2.1_3.jar
geronimo-commonj_1.1_spec-1.0.jar
> > There are no NOTICE and LICENSE files in the META-INF directory in the
> > war file; ideally these should be present - in this case they will be
> > the same as the ones in the binary archive.
> >
> > There's some inconsistency between the NOTICE files.
> >
> > The top-level NOTICE file in the binary archive says:
> >
> > Copyright (c) 2008 - 2009
> >
> > whereas the NOTICE file in the photoark-assets-M1-incubating.jar
> > META-INF directory says:
> >
> > Copyright (c) 2005 - 2008 The Apache Software Foundation
> >
> > The parent pom says the inception year is 2008, so the latter file looks wrong.
> > Seems to be an error in the NOTICE skeleton files.
> >
>
>
> These does not seem as release blockers to me. Do you agree ?
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 3:57 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 31/08/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks for all the reviews and feedback for the PhotArk RC2. I have
>> fixed all the severe and blocking issues and have produced a new RC...
>>
>> Please follow the link below for the new RC details :
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00145.html
>
> For the benefit of other reviewers, here are the details:
>
> <quote>
> The artifacts are available for review at:
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende/photark/M1-incubating-RC3/
>
> This includes the signed binary and source distributions, the RAT report,
> and the Maven staging repository.
>
> The release tag is available at :
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/photark/tags/M1-incubating-RC3/
> </quote>
>
> Sigs and hashes OK. However no SHA hashes - only MD5 - are provided.
> tgz and zip archives agree with each other. Source archives agree with SVN tag.
>
> SVN has one incorrect setting:
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_on.gif
> [not a blocker]
>
> The binary NOTICE file has a lot of paragraphs which start:
>
> "This product includes/uses ..."
>
> The NOTICE file should only include required 3rd party notices; code
> that is used (but not included) should not be mentioned in the NOTICE
> file, so the /uses part and any non-included 3rd party dependencies
> need to be removed.
>
I did a cross-check to make sure only the used dependencies were
mentioned in the LICENSE and got the notices sniptes from these
required dependencies. Do you see a specific piece that should be
removed ?
> There are no NOTICE and LICENSE files in the META-INF directory in the
> war file; ideally these should be present - in this case they will be
> the same as the ones in the binary archive.
>
> There's some inconsistency between the NOTICE files.
>
> The top-level NOTICE file in the binary archive says:
>
> Copyright (c) 2008 - 2009
>
> whereas the NOTICE file in the photoark-assets-M1-incubating.jar
> META-INF directory says:
>
> Copyright (c) 2005 - 2008 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> The parent pom says the inception year is 2008, so the latter file looks wrong.
> Seems to be an error in the NOTICE skeleton files.
>
These does not seem as release blockers to me. Do you agree ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 31/08/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for all the reviews and feedback for the PhotArk RC2. I have
> fixed all the severe and blocking issues and have produced a new RC...
>
> Please follow the link below for the new RC details :
>
> http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00145.html
For the benefit of other reviewers, here are the details:
<quote>
The artifacts are available for review at:
http://people.apache.org/~lresende/photark/M1-incubating-RC3/
This includes the signed binary and source distributions, the RAT report,
and the Maven staging repository.
The release tag is available at :
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/photark/tags/M1-incubating-RC3/
</quote>
Sigs and hashes OK. However no SHA hashes - only MD5 - are provided.
tgz and zip archives agree with each other. Source archives agree with SVN tag.
SVN has one incorrect setting:
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_on.gif
[not a blocker]
The binary NOTICE file has a lot of paragraphs which start:
"This product includes/uses ..."
The NOTICE file should only include required 3rd party notices; code
that is used (but not included) should not be mentioned in the NOTICE
file, so the /uses part and any non-included 3rd party dependencies
need to be removed.
There are no NOTICE and LICENSE files in the META-INF directory in the
war file; ideally these should be present - in this case they will be
the same as the ones in the binary archive.
There's some inconsistency between the NOTICE files.
The top-level NOTICE file in the binary archive says:
Copyright (c) 2008 - 2009
whereas the NOTICE file in the photoark-assets-M1-incubating.jar
META-INF directory says:
Copyright (c) 2005 - 2008 The Apache Software Foundation
The parent pom says the inception year is 2008, so the latter file looks wrong.
Seems to be an error in the NOTICE skeleton files.
> Thanks
>
>
> --
>
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for all the reviews and feedback for the PhotArk RC2. I have
fixed all the severe and blocking issues and have produced a new RC...
Please follow the link below for the new RC details :
http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00145.html
Thanks
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 22/08/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 6:16 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sigs and hashes OK; tgz and zip agree with each other.
> >
> > However, the source archive does not agree with the SVN tag - the
> > versions are different in various pom.xml files.
>
>
> Can you give me one example ? The verious pom.xml should have version
> id as <version>M1-incubating</version>.
>
SVN: assets/pom.xml
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.tuscany.sca</groupId>
<artifactId>tuscany-sca-api-extension</artifactId>
<version>1.5</version>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
Archive: assets/pom.xml
<dependency>
<groupId>org.apache.tuscany.sca</groupId>
<artifactId>tuscany-sca-api-extension</artifactId>
<version>1.4</version>
<scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
Similarly for other dependencies and for other POMs.
> >Also there is no DISCLAIMER in the source archive.
> >
>
> Fixed. Would this require a new RC ?
Yes, and new SVN tag.
>
> > The distribution/src/main/release/bin/LICENSE file is also different
> > between SVN and the source archive. But I would not expect to find a
> > LICENSE file there anyway.
>
>
> The distribution/src/main/release/bin/LICENSE is used to generate the
> binary distribution, while the LICENSE in the root of the svn is the
> one used for the source distribution. I'm not sure what do you mean by
> "But I would not expect to find a LICENSE file there anyway.", as my
> understanding is that the the source release would have a Apache
> License there, and any other third party licenses appropriate for the
> source distribution.
AIUI, the normal place for Maven resources such as this is
src/main/resources
Also it's different from the version in SVN - the versions of tuscany
jars have changed.
>
> >
> > I'm not sure why there are additional copies of the NOTICE, LICENSE
> > etc files in the subdirectories; there should only be copies in the
> > top-level directory.
>
>
> Similar to above, the copies in the subdirectory are used in the
> binary distribution.
But there is only a single binary distribution, so surely there should
be at most one common additional LICENSE file? There's one in each
module.
>
> >
> > There's no DISCLAIMER in the binary archive.
> >
>
>
> Fixed
>
>
> > Minor problems:
> >
> > Builds OK using M2/Java 1.5, but there don't appear to be any tests run.
> >
> >
> > README and INSTALL mention April 2009 release.
> >
> > The INSTALL file does not really explain how to install anything.
> >
> > The POM file needs to specify the encoding to avoid warnings such as
> > the following:
> >
> > [WARNING] File encoding has not been set, using platform encoding
> > Cp1252, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> > [WARNING] Using platform encoding (Cp1252 actually) to copy filtered
> > resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> >
>
>
> What is needed here ? I checked all the pom.xml and they all seem to
> have the necessary UTF-8 encoding
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
You need to set the property for the Maven Resources Plugin:
<project.build.sourceEncoding>UTF-8</project.build.sourceEncoding>
Might as well do the same for reports:
<project.reporting.outputEncoding>UTF-8</project.reporting.outputEncoding>
> Note that, looking on the pom.xml from a browser, the encode
> information is not showed, but a view source or looking directly into
> the code does show the proper encoding there.
>
> If you have a specific pom.xml that has this info missing, please let me know.
Set it in the parent pom.
>
> > Not a release blocker, but worth fixing in SVN trunk:
> >
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native DISCLAIMER
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/DISCLAIMER
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/LICENSE
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/NOTICE
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/DISCLAIMER
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/LICENSE
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/NOTICE
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/DISCLAIMER
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/LICENSE
> > svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/NOTICE
> >
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/index.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/index_on.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next_disabled.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next_on.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev_disabled.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev_on.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/styles.css
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/index.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/index_on.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next_disabled.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next_on.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_disabled.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_on.gif
> > svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/styles.css
> >
>
>
> Fixed both in trunk and release branch.
>
>
> >> > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00139.html
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 6:16 PM, sebb<se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sigs and hashes OK; tgz and zip agree with each other.
>
> However, the source archive does not agree with the SVN tag - the
> versions are different in various pom.xml files.
Can you give me one example ? The verious pom.xml should have version
id as <version>M1-incubating</version>.
>Also there is no DISCLAIMER in the source archive.
>
Fixed. Would this require a new RC ?
> The distribution/src/main/release/bin/LICENSE file is also different
> between SVN and the source archive. But I would not expect to find a
> LICENSE file there anyway.
The distribution/src/main/release/bin/LICENSE is used to generate the
binary distribution, while the LICENSE in the root of the svn is the
one used for the source distribution. I'm not sure what do you mean by
"But I would not expect to find a LICENSE file there anyway.", as my
understanding is that the the source release would have a Apache
License there, and any other third party licenses appropriate for the
source distribution.
>
> I'm not sure why there are additional copies of the NOTICE, LICENSE
> etc files in the subdirectories; there should only be copies in the
> top-level directory.
Similar to above, the copies in the subdirectory are used in the
binary distribution.
>
> There's no DISCLAIMER in the binary archive.
>
Fixed
> Minor problems:
>
> Builds OK using M2/Java 1.5, but there don't appear to be any tests run.
>
>
> README and INSTALL mention April 2009 release.
>
> The INSTALL file does not really explain how to install anything.
>
> The POM file needs to specify the encoding to avoid warnings such as
> the following:
>
> [WARNING] File encoding has not been set, using platform encoding
> Cp1252, i.e. build is platform dependent!
> [WARNING] Using platform encoding (Cp1252 actually) to copy filtered
> resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
>
What is needed here ? I checked all the pom.xml and they all seem to
have the necessary UTF-8 encoding
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
Note that, looking on the pom.xml from a browser, the encode
information is not showed, but a view source or looking directly into
the code does show the proper encoding there.
If you have a specific pom.xml that has this info missing, please let me know.
> Not a release blocker, but worth fixing in SVN trunk:
>
> svn ps svn:eol-style native DISCLAIMER
> svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/DISCLAIMER
> svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/LICENSE
> svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/NOTICE
> svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/DISCLAIMER
> svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/LICENSE
> svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/NOTICE
> svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/DISCLAIMER
> svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/LICENSE
> svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/NOTICE
>
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/index.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/index_on.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next_disabled.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next_on.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev_disabled.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev_on.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/styles.css
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/index.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/index_on.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next_disabled.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next_on.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_disabled.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_on.gif
> svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/styles.css
>
Fixed both in trunk and release branch.
>> > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00139.html
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 20/08/2009, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Luciano Resende<lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Apache PhotArk will be a complete open source photo gallery
> > application including a content repository for the images, a display
> > piece, an access control layer, and upload capabilities. The idea is
> > to have a rigid design for the content repository with a very flexible
> > display piece. The images in the content repository will be protected
> > with granular access control.
> >
> > We are getting a release vote out [1], aiming getting more exposure
> > and attract more contributors to the community, and would appreciate
> > if we could get some people helping us review the release artifacts as
> > we are currently a very small community with only one mentor.
> >
>
>
> We are looking for one more vote on the release, before we can request
> IPMC approval. Anyone willing to review it ???
>
Sigs and hashes OK; tgz and zip agree with each other.
However, the source archive does not agree with the SVN tag - the
versions are different in various pom.xml files. Also there is no
DISCLAIMER in the source archive.
The distribution/src/main/release/bin/LICENSE file is also different
between SVN and the source archive. But I would not expect to find a
LICENSE file there anyway.
I'm not sure why there are additional copies of the NOTICE, LICENSE
etc files in the subdirectories; there should only be copies in the
top-level directory.
There's no DISCLAIMER in the binary archive.
Minor problems:
Builds OK using M2/Java 1.5, but there don't appear to be any tests run.
README and INSTALL mention April 2009 release.
The INSTALL file does not really explain how to install anything.
The POM file needs to specify the encoding to avoid warnings such as
the following:
[WARNING] File encoding has not been set, using platform encoding
Cp1252, i.e. build is platform dependent!
[WARNING] Using platform encoding (Cp1252 actually) to copy filtered
resources, i.e. build is platform dependent!
Not a release blocker, but worth fixing in SVN trunk:
svn ps svn:eol-style native DISCLAIMER
svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/DISCLAIMER
svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/LICENSE
svn ps svn:eol-style native assets/NOTICE
svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/DISCLAIMER
svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/LICENSE
svn ps svn:eol-style native photark/NOTICE
svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/DISCLAIMER
svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/LICENSE
svn ps svn:eol-style native photark-webapp/NOTICE
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/index.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/index_on.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next_disabled.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/next_on.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev_disabled.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/prev_on.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark/src/main/resources/styles.css
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/index.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/index_on.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next_disabled.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/next_on.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_disabled.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/prev_on.gif
svn pd svn:executable photark-webapp/src/main/webapp/styles.css
> > [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00139.html
> >
> > --
> > Luciano Resende
> > http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> > http://lresende.blogspot.com/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Help reviewing PhotArk podling release
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Luciano Resende<lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apache PhotArk will be a complete open source photo gallery
> application including a content repository for the images, a display
> piece, an access control layer, and upload capabilities. The idea is
> to have a rigid design for the content repository with a very flexible
> display piece. The images in the content repository will be protected
> with granular access control.
>
> We are getting a release vote out [1], aiming getting more exposure
> and attract more contributors to the community, and would appreciate
> if we could get some people helping us review the release artifacts as
> we are currently a very small community with only one mentor.
>
We are looking for one more vote on the release, before we can request
IPMC approval. Anyone willing to review it ???
> [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/photark-dev@incubator.apache.org/msg00139.html
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org