You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@petri.apache.org by wa...@apache.org on 2022/04/23 17:15:56 UTC
[petri] branch master updated: Update info.yaml
This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
wave pushed a commit to branch master
in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/petri.git
The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
new c019c9b Update info.yaml
c019c9b is described below
commit c019c9b9162031d235b0364536a814a24aa96750
Author: Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
AuthorDate: Sat Apr 23 10:15:52 2022 -0700
Update info.yaml
---
info.yaml | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/info.yaml b/info.yaml
index 0f292ff..8db7818 100644
--- a/info.yaml
+++ b/info.yaml
@@ -43,8 +43,8 @@ cultures:
sga: yes
icla: yes
headers: no
- license: no
- notice: no
+ license: yes
+ notice: yes
# notify these followers before making breaking changes
followers:
Re: Buildstream status update
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
Hi -
Here is the Legal FAQ about the policy.
https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#headers
> On Apr 25, 2022, at 12:57 AM, Tristan Van Berkom <tr...@codethink.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the update...
>
> On Sat, 2022-04-23 at 10:28 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> Hi Sander,
>>
>> I’ve updated the Buildstream status:
>> - https://petri.apache.org/buildstream
>> - https://petri.apache.org/info.yaml
>>
>> I reviewed the repository and I’m not sure if I can check the source
>> header box.
>>
>> (1) Copyright statements remain. (I would accept that this will
>> change once BuildStream is a TLP)
>
> I wasn't aware we we're supposed to remove personal/corporate copyright
> statements from files, do I understand correctly that we should remove
> these from source files ?
Yes
>
>> (2) Should files like: master/src/buildstream/data/projectconfig.yaml
>> have an ASF Header? Likely yes.
>
> This file contains default project configuration data (not code), we
> have explicitly preferred to never include copyright/license headings
> to such files because we render these files verbatim into the
> documentation, which is very convenient and reliable, e.g.:
>
> https://docs.buildstream.build/master/format_project.html#builtin-defaults
>
> Our rationale so far for such yaml files has been that adding
> license/formal disclaimers/copyright statements etc to the heading of
> such files would detract from the readability of the documentation, and
> as they are just configuration data, we would prefer to leave these
> clean.
>
> Will it be acceptable to continue to leave these configuration files
> without license related headings ?
Many are rather strict about this matter. I find the rationale that these configurations are part of documentation to be persuasive. Will these files be included in the source release?
>
>> Has anyone run a RAT check?
>
> Is that what this java project is https://creadur.apache.org/rat/ ?
Yes.
>
> No I have not tried to run this tool, I don't think anyone on the team
> has either as this is the first I'm hearing of it.
It’s not compulsory. It’s just helpful in making sure that source files have headers and all the licenses are identified.
There is an exclusions file where you put files and paths that are intentionally left without a license header.
>
> Cheers,
> -Tristan
>
>
Re: Buildstream status update
Posted by Tristan Van Berkom <tr...@codethink.co.uk>.
Hi,
Thanks for the update...
On Sat, 2022-04-23 at 10:28 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi Sander,
>
> I’ve updated the Buildstream status:
> - https://petri.apache.org/buildstream
> - https://petri.apache.org/info.yaml
>
> I reviewed the repository and I’m not sure if I can check the source
> header box.
>
> (1) Copyright statements remain. (I would accept that this will
> change once BuildStream is a TLP)
I wasn't aware we we're supposed to remove personal/corporate copyright
statements from files, do I understand correctly that we should remove
these from source files ?
> (2) Should files like: master/src/buildstream/data/projectconfig.yaml
> have an ASF Header? Likely yes.
This file contains default project configuration data (not code), we
have explicitly preferred to never include copyright/license headings
to such files because we render these files verbatim into the
documentation, which is very convenient and reliable, e.g.:
https://docs.buildstream.build/master/format_project.html#builtin-defaults
Our rationale so far for such yaml files has been that adding
license/formal disclaimers/copyright statements etc to the heading of
such files would detract from the readability of the documentation, and
as they are just configuration data, we would prefer to leave these
clean.
Will it be acceptable to continue to leave these configuration files
without license related headings ?
> Has anyone run a RAT check?
Is that what this java project is https://creadur.apache.org/rat/ ?
No I have not tried to run this tool, I don't think anyone on the team
has either as this is the first I'm hearing of it.
Cheers,
-Tristan
Re: Buildstream status update
Posted by Tristan Van Berkom <tr...@codethink.co.uk>.
Hi,
Thanks for the update...
On Sat, 2022-04-23 at 10:28 -0700, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Hi Sander,
>
> I’ve updated the Buildstream status:
> - https://petri.apache.org/buildstream
> - https://petri.apache.org/info.yaml
>
> I reviewed the repository and I’m not sure if I can check the source
> header box.
>
> (1) Copyright statements remain. (I would accept that this will
> change once BuildStream is a TLP)
I wasn't aware we we're supposed to remove personal/corporate copyright
statements from files, do I understand correctly that we should remove
these from source files ?
> (2) Should files like: master/src/buildstream/data/projectconfig.yaml
> have an ASF Header? Likely yes.
This file contains default project configuration data (not code), we
have explicitly preferred to never include copyright/license headings
to such files because we render these files verbatim into the
documentation, which is very convenient and reliable, e.g.:
https://docs.buildstream.build/master/format_project.html#builtin-defaults
Our rationale so far for such yaml files has been that adding
license/formal disclaimers/copyright statements etc to the heading of
such files would detract from the readability of the documentation, and
as they are just configuration data, we would prefer to leave these
clean.
Will it be acceptable to continue to leave these configuration files
without license related headings ?
> Has anyone run a RAT check?
Is that what this java project is https://creadur.apache.org/rat/ ?
No I have not tried to run this tool, I don't think anyone on the team
has either as this is the first I'm hearing of it.
Cheers,
-Tristan
Buildstream status update
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
Hi Sander,
I’ve updated the Buildstream status:
- https://petri.apache.org/buildstream
- https://petri.apache.org/info.yaml
I reviewed the repository and I’m not sure if I can check the source header box.
(1) Copyright statements remain. (I would accept that this will change once BuildStream is a TLP)
(2) Should files like: master/src/buildstream/data/projectconfig.yaml have an ASF Header? Likely yes.
Has anyone run a RAT check?
Let’s finish this and prepare a TLP Resolution for the next board meeting.
All The Best,
Dave
> On Apr 23, 2022, at 10:15 AM, wave@apache.org wrote:
>
> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>
> wave pushed a commit to branch master
> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/petri.git
>
>
> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
> new c019c9b Update info.yaml
> c019c9b is described below
>
> commit c019c9b9162031d235b0364536a814a24aa96750
> Author: Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
> AuthorDate: Sat Apr 23 10:15:52 2022 -0700
>
> Update info.yaml
> ---
> info.yaml | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/info.yaml b/info.yaml
> index 0f292ff..8db7818 100644
> --- a/info.yaml
> +++ b/info.yaml
> @@ -43,8 +43,8 @@ cultures:
> sga: yes
> icla: yes
> headers: no
> - license: no
> - notice: no
> + license: yes
> + notice: yes
>
> # notify these followers before making breaking changes
> followers:
>
Buildstream status update
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
Hi Sander,
I’ve updated the Buildstream status:
- https://petri.apache.org/buildstream
- https://petri.apache.org/info.yaml
I reviewed the repository and I’m not sure if I can check the source header box.
(1) Copyright statements remain. (I would accept that this will change once BuildStream is a TLP)
(2) Should files like: master/src/buildstream/data/projectconfig.yaml have an ASF Header? Likely yes.
Has anyone run a RAT check?
Let’s finish this and prepare a TLP Resolution for the next board meeting.
All The Best,
Dave
> On Apr 23, 2022, at 10:15 AM, wave@apache.org wrote:
>
> This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository.
>
> wave pushed a commit to branch master
> in repository https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/petri.git
>
>
> The following commit(s) were added to refs/heads/master by this push:
> new c019c9b Update info.yaml
> c019c9b is described below
>
> commit c019c9b9162031d235b0364536a814a24aa96750
> Author: Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>
> AuthorDate: Sat Apr 23 10:15:52 2022 -0700
>
> Update info.yaml
> ---
> info.yaml | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/info.yaml b/info.yaml
> index 0f292ff..8db7818 100644
> --- a/info.yaml
> +++ b/info.yaml
> @@ -43,8 +43,8 @@ cultures:
> sga: yes
> icla: yes
> headers: no
> - license: no
> - notice: no
> + license: yes
> + notice: yes
>
> # notify these followers before making breaking changes
> followers:
>