You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hudi.apache.org by vino yang <ya...@gmail.com> on 2020/03/18 10:26:52 UTC
[NOTIFICATION] Hudi 0.5.2 Release Daily Report-20200318
Hi all,
We encountered some issues while voting RC1 on general@[1], so we canceled
the vote for rc1. The blocker issues we are currently addressing are:
* HUDI-720: NOTICE file needs to add more content based on the NOTICE files
of the ASF projects that hudi bundles(I have opened a PR[2] to fix it)
* We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use of
WIP Disclaimer
I will prepare 0.5.2 RC2 ASAP after fixing them. Please be patient.
Best,
Vino
[1]:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/202003.mbox/%3C932F44A0-1CEE-4549-896B-70FB61EAA034%40classsoftware.com%3E
[2]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1417
[3]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1386
Re: [NOTIFICATION] Hudi 0.5.2 Release Daily Report-20200318
Posted by vino yang <ya...@gmail.com>.
OK, Got it!
Best,
Vino
Vinoth Chandar <vi...@apache.org> 于2020年3月19日周四 下午5:12写道：
> > So you mean, we keep the standard disclaimer?
> yes. its needed eventually anyway.. Our main goal in 0.5.2 to get the
> LICENSE/NOTICE in shape and get a +1 with the standard disclaimer.
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 4:01 PM vino yang <ya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Vinoth,
> >
> > >>We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use
> of
> > WIP Disclaimer
> > >>I think we should address the feedback and ensure VOTE passed with "non
> > >>WIP" disclaimer.. the WIP disclaimer cannot be retained forever and
> needs
> > >>to be fixed before graduation IIUC.
> >
> > So you mean, we keep the standard disclaimer? Then we can discuss it when
> > we vote for rc2, if someone raises this issue again. WDYT?
> >
> > >>As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files,
> > >>Again, we are back to binary vs source releases.. the source releases
> we
> > >>make DO NOT bundle anything.. So we should not have to add anything to
> > >>NOTICE. The same link mentioned, also states, "dont include stuff
> > >>unnecessarily" (not a quote). Does maven jars count as binary
> > distribution
> > >>of software? I suggest we file a LEGAL issue, get it stamped by the
> right
> > >>folks and do that. This can be a good strategy, in addition to looking
> > at
> > >>other projects.
> >
> > So, the question remains how to look at the word "*bundle*".
> >
> > We have some weird statements in the LICENSE file, excerpted one of them
> as
> > follows:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> *--------------------------------------------------------------------------------This
> > product includes code from Apache Hive.*
> > org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.io.CombineHiveInputFormat copied to
> > org.apache.hudi.hadoop.hive.HoodieCombineHiveInputFormatCopyright:
> > 2011-2019 The Apache Software FoundationHome page:
> http://hive.apache.org/
> > <http://hive.apache.org/>License:
> > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> > <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> >
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
> >
> > Regarding "*This product includes code from *", I don't seem to see this
> > pattern from other projects.
> >
> > So the question here is, even if we only publish the source code, is this
> > behavior considered as bundling other projects (because we do copy the
> > source code from other projects, the source code is obviously one of the
> > assets of other projects)? Unfortunately, I did not find a clear
> > clarification from the Apache official website. Obviously, there are two
> > possibilities here:
> >
> >
> > - This is a kind of bundle, but we are not clear or there is a
> deviation
> > in understanding;
> > - This is not a bundle, but there is a misunderstanding during voting,
> > and we have not clarified this;
> >
> >
> > In short, our LICENSE contains a relatively uncommon description "*This
> > product includes code from *". In this regard, the main problem here is
> the
> > information asymmetry between us and the IPMC. I don't think it makes
> much
> > sense to refer to other projects or interpret the official documents. A
> > more efficient way is to communicate directly with Justin and clarify.
> > Understand his thoughts and express our confusion.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Best,
> > Vino
> >
> >
> > Vinoth Chandar <vi...@apache.org> 于2020年3月19日周四 上午12:05写道：
> >
> > > Thanks for the update, vino!
> > >
> > > here's the -1 vote feedback for everyone's context..
> > >
> > > As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files, their
> NOTICE
> > > > files need to be examined and parts added to your NOTICE file. [1]
> > > > License is missing information fo this file copyright Twitter [3]
> > > > Perhaps you should consider using the work in progress disclaimer.
> [2]
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Justin
> > > > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
> > > > 2.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#work_in_progress_disclaimer
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >>We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing
> use
> > of
> > > WIP Disclaimer
> > > I think we should address the feedback and ensure VOTE passed with "non
> > > WIP" disclaimer.. the WIP disclaimer cannot be retained forever and
> needs
> > > to be fixed before graduation IIUC.
> > >
> > > >>As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files,
> > > Again, we are back to binary vs source releases.. the source releases
> we
> > > make DO NOT bundle anything.. So we should not have to add anything to
> > > NOTICE. The same link mentioned, also states, "dont include stuff
> > > unnecessarily" (not a quote). Does maven jars count as binary
> > distribution
> > > of software? I suggest we file a LEGAL issue, get it stamped by the
> right
> > > folks and do that. This can be a good strategy, in addition to looking
> > at
> > > other projects.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 3:27 AM vino yang <ya...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > We encountered some issues while voting RC1 on general@[1], so we
> > > canceled
> > > > the vote for rc1. The blocker issues we are currently addressing are:
> > > >
> > > > * HUDI-720: NOTICE file needs to add more content based on the NOTICE
> > > files
> > > > of the ASF projects that hudi bundles(I have opened a PR[2] to fix
> it)
> > > > * We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing
> > use
> > > of
> > > > WIP Disclaimer
> > > >
> > > > I will prepare 0.5.2 RC2 ASAP after fixing them. Please be patient.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Vino
> > > >
> > > > [1]:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/202003.mbox/%3C932F44A0-1CEE-4549-896B-70FB61EAA034%40classsoftware.com%3E
> > > > [2]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1417
> > > > [3]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1386
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [NOTIFICATION] Hudi 0.5.2 Release Daily Report-20200318
Posted by Vinoth Chandar <vi...@apache.org>.
> So you mean, we keep the standard disclaimer?
yes. its needed eventually anyway.. Our main goal in 0.5.2 to get the
LICENSE/NOTICE in shape and get a +1 with the standard disclaimer.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 4:01 PM vino yang <ya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Vinoth,
>
> >>We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use of
> WIP Disclaimer
> >>I think we should address the feedback and ensure VOTE passed with "non
> >>WIP" disclaimer.. the WIP disclaimer cannot be retained forever and needs
> >>to be fixed before graduation IIUC.
>
> So you mean, we keep the standard disclaimer? Then we can discuss it when
> we vote for rc2, if someone raises this issue again. WDYT?
>
> >>As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files,
> >>Again, we are back to binary vs source releases.. the source releases we
> >>make DO NOT bundle anything.. So we should not have to add anything to
> >>NOTICE. The same link mentioned, also states, "dont include stuff
> >>unnecessarily" (not a quote). Does maven jars count as binary
> distribution
> >>of software? I suggest we file a LEGAL issue, get it stamped by the right
> >>folks and do that. This can be a good strategy, in addition to looking
> at
> >>other projects.
>
> So, the question remains how to look at the word "*bundle*".
>
> We have some weird statements in the LICENSE file, excerpted one of them as
> follows:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *--------------------------------------------------------------------------------This
> product includes code from Apache Hive.*
> org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.io.CombineHiveInputFormat copied to
> org.apache.hudi.hadoop.hive.HoodieCombineHiveInputFormatCopyright:
> 2011-2019 The Apache Software FoundationHome page: http://hive.apache.org/
> <http://hive.apache.org/>License:
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> >--------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
>
> Regarding "*This product includes code from *", I don't seem to see this
> pattern from other projects.
>
> So the question here is, even if we only publish the source code, is this
> behavior considered as bundling other projects (because we do copy the
> source code from other projects, the source code is obviously one of the
> assets of other projects)? Unfortunately, I did not find a clear
> clarification from the Apache official website. Obviously, there are two
> possibilities here:
>
>
> - This is a kind of bundle, but we are not clear or there is a deviation
> in understanding;
> - This is not a bundle, but there is a misunderstanding during voting,
> and we have not clarified this;
>
>
> In short, our LICENSE contains a relatively uncommon description "*This
> product includes code from *". In this regard, the main problem here is the
> information asymmetry between us and the IPMC. I don't think it makes much
> sense to refer to other projects or interpret the official documents. A
> more efficient way is to communicate directly with Justin and clarify.
> Understand his thoughts and express our confusion.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best,
> Vino
>
>
> Vinoth Chandar <vi...@apache.org> 于2020年3月19日周四 上午12:05写道：
>
> > Thanks for the update, vino!
> >
> > here's the -1 vote feedback for everyone's context..
> >
> > As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files, their NOTICE
> > > files need to be examined and parts added to your NOTICE file. [1]
> > > License is missing information fo this file copyright Twitter [3]
> > > Perhaps you should consider using the work in progress disclaimer. [2]
> > > Thanks,
> > > Justin
> > > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
> > > 2.
> > >
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#work_in_progress_disclaimer
> >
> >
> >
> > >>We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use
> of
> > WIP Disclaimer
> > I think we should address the feedback and ensure VOTE passed with "non
> > WIP" disclaimer.. the WIP disclaimer cannot be retained forever and needs
> > to be fixed before graduation IIUC.
> >
> > >>As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files,
> > Again, we are back to binary vs source releases.. the source releases we
> > make DO NOT bundle anything.. So we should not have to add anything to
> > NOTICE. The same link mentioned, also states, "dont include stuff
> > unnecessarily" (not a quote). Does maven jars count as binary
> distribution
> > of software? I suggest we file a LEGAL issue, get it stamped by the right
> > folks and do that. This can be a good strategy, in addition to looking
> at
> > other projects.
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 3:27 AM vino yang <ya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > We encountered some issues while voting RC1 on general@[1], so we
> > canceled
> > > the vote for rc1. The blocker issues we are currently addressing are:
> > >
> > > * HUDI-720: NOTICE file needs to add more content based on the NOTICE
> > files
> > > of the ASF projects that hudi bundles(I have opened a PR[2] to fix it)
> > > * We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing
> use
> > of
> > > WIP Disclaimer
> > >
> > > I will prepare 0.5.2 RC2 ASAP after fixing them. Please be patient.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Vino
> > >
> > > [1]:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/202003.mbox/%3C932F44A0-1CEE-4549-896B-70FB61EAA034%40classsoftware.com%3E
> > > [2]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1417
> > > [3]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1386
> > >
> >
>
Re: [NOTIFICATION] Hudi 0.5.2 Release Daily Report-20200318
Posted by vino yang <ya...@gmail.com>.
Hi Vinoth,
>>We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use of
WIP Disclaimer
>>I think we should address the feedback and ensure VOTE passed with "non
>>WIP" disclaimer.. the WIP disclaimer cannot be retained forever and needs
>>to be fixed before graduation IIUC.
So you mean, we keep the standard disclaimer? Then we can discuss it when
we vote for rc2, if someone raises this issue again. WDYT?
>>As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files,
>>Again, we are back to binary vs source releases.. the source releases we
>>make DO NOT bundle anything.. So we should not have to add anything to
>>NOTICE. The same link mentioned, also states, "dont include stuff
>>unnecessarily" (not a quote). Does maven jars count as binary distribution
>>of software? I suggest we file a LEGAL issue, get it stamped by the right
>>folks and do that. This can be a good strategy, in addition to looking at
>>other projects.
So, the question remains how to look at the word "*bundle*".
We have some weird statements in the LICENSE file, excerpted one of them as
follows:
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------------This
product includes code from Apache Hive.*
org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.io.CombineHiveInputFormat copied to
org.apache.hudi.hadoop.hive.HoodieCombineHiveInputFormatCopyright:
2011-2019 The Apache Software FoundationHome page: http://hive.apache.org/
<http://hive.apache.org/>License:
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
<http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------*
Regarding "*This product includes code from *", I don't seem to see this
pattern from other projects.
So the question here is, even if we only publish the source code, is this
behavior considered as bundling other projects (because we do copy the
source code from other projects, the source code is obviously one of the
assets of other projects)? Unfortunately, I did not find a clear
clarification from the Apache official website. Obviously, there are two
possibilities here:
- This is a kind of bundle, but we are not clear or there is a deviation
in understanding;
- This is not a bundle, but there is a misunderstanding during voting,
and we have not clarified this;
In short, our LICENSE contains a relatively uncommon description "*This
product includes code from *". In this regard, the main problem here is the
information asymmetry between us and the IPMC. I don't think it makes much
sense to refer to other projects or interpret the official documents. A
more efficient way is to communicate directly with Justin and clarify.
Understand his thoughts and express our confusion.
What do you think?
Best,
Vino
Vinoth Chandar <vi...@apache.org> 于2020年3月19日周四 上午12:05写道：
> Thanks for the update, vino!
>
> here's the -1 vote feedback for everyone's context..
>
> As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files, their NOTICE
> > files need to be examined and parts added to your NOTICE file. [1]
> > License is missing information fo this file copyright Twitter [3]
> > Perhaps you should consider using the work in progress disclaimer. [2]
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> > 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
> > 2.
> >
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#work_in_progress_disclaimer
>
>
>
> >>We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use of
> WIP Disclaimer
> I think we should address the feedback and ensure VOTE passed with "non
> WIP" disclaimer.. the WIP disclaimer cannot be retained forever and needs
> to be fixed before graduation IIUC.
>
> >>As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files,
> Again, we are back to binary vs source releases.. the source releases we
> make DO NOT bundle anything.. So we should not have to add anything to
> NOTICE. The same link mentioned, also states, "dont include stuff
> unnecessarily" (not a quote). Does maven jars count as binary distribution
> of software? I suggest we file a LEGAL issue, get it stamped by the right
> folks and do that. This can be a good strategy, in addition to looking at
> other projects.
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 3:27 AM vino yang <ya...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > We encountered some issues while voting RC1 on general@[1], so we
> canceled
> > the vote for rc1. The blocker issues we are currently addressing are:
> >
> > * HUDI-720: NOTICE file needs to add more content based on the NOTICE
> files
> > of the ASF projects that hudi bundles(I have opened a PR[2] to fix it)
> > * We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use
> of
> > WIP Disclaimer
> >
> > I will prepare 0.5.2 RC2 ASAP after fixing them. Please be patient.
> >
> > Best,
> > Vino
> >
> > [1]:
> >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/202003.mbox/%3C932F44A0-1CEE-4549-896B-70FB61EAA034%40classsoftware.com%3E
> > [2]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1417
> > [3]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1386
> >
>
Re: [NOTIFICATION] Hudi 0.5.2 Release Daily Report-20200318
Posted by Vinoth Chandar <vi...@apache.org>.
Thanks for the update, vino!
here's the -1 vote feedback for everyone's context..
As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files, their NOTICE
> files need to be examined and parts added to your NOTICE file. [1]
> License is missing information fo this file copyright Twitter [3]
> Perhaps you should consider using the work in progress disclaimer. [2]
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#alv2-dep
> 2.
> https://incubator.apache.org/policy/incubation.html#work_in_progress_disclaimer
>>We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use of
WIP Disclaimer
I think we should address the feedback and ensure VOTE passed with "non
WIP" disclaimer.. the WIP disclaimer cannot be retained forever and needs
to be fixed before graduation IIUC.
>>As you bundled several ASF projects that have NOTICE files,
Again, we are back to binary vs source releases.. the source releases we
make DO NOT bundle anything.. So we should not have to add anything to
NOTICE. The same link mentioned, also states, "dont include stuff
unnecessarily" (not a quote). Does maven jars count as binary distribution
of software? I suggest we file a LEGAL issue, get it stamped by the right
folks and do that. This can be a good strategy, in addition to looking at
other projects.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 3:27 AM vino yang <ya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We encountered some issues while voting RC1 on general@[1], so we canceled
> the vote for rc1. The blocker issues we are currently addressing are:
>
> * HUDI-720: NOTICE file needs to add more content based on the NOTICE files
> of the ASF projects that hudi bundles(I have opened a PR[2] to fix it)
> * We may need to revert HUDI-676[3]: Address issues towards removing use of
> WIP Disclaimer
>
> I will prepare 0.5.2 RC2 ASAP after fixing them. Please be patient.
>
> Best,
> Vino
>
> [1]:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/202003.mbox/%3C932F44A0-1CEE-4549-896B-70FB61EAA034%40classsoftware.com%3E
> [2]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1417
> [3]: https://github.com/apache/incubator-hudi/pull/1386
>