You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> on 2007/03/20 13:28:20 UTC

[VOTE] [Retry] Approve the release of Apache Lucene.Net 2.0 build 004 incubating

Hi folks,

This is a re-vote request for the release of Incubating Apache Lucene.Net
2.0 build 004.  I have addressed the issues raised from the previous vote
request.

Below are the release details:

Release history:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/tags/Lucene.Net_2_0_0/
src/HISTORY.txt

Release artifact (source & binary):
http://people.apache.org/~aroush/Lucene.Net-2.0-004/

I'm asking for your vote to approve this release.

[ ] +1 Approve the release as Apache Lucene.Net 2.0.0 build 004 incubating
[ ] -1 Veto this release (explain why so it can be addressed)

Regards,

-- George Aroush


-----Original Message-----
From: George Aroush [mailto:george@aroush.net] 
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 7:30 PM
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Lucene.Net 2.0 build 003
incubating

Hi folks,

Lucene.Net community has voted to release Lucene.Net 2.0 build 003
incubating.  I am emailing you to request your vote for this release.

(For those who are not familiar with Lucene.Net, please visit
http://incubator.apache.org/lucene.net/ to learn more.)

Below are the release details.

Release history:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/trunk/C%23/src/HISTORY
.txt

Release artifact (source & binary):
http://people.apache.org/~aroush/Lucene.Net-2.0-003/

Release vote history on Lucene.Net mailing list:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-lucene-net-dev/200702.mbo
x/%3c118901c75a1c$30ca58e0$6501a8c0@aroushlt%3e and
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-lucene-net-user/200702.mb
ox/%3c118901c75a1c$30ca58e0$6501a8c0@aroushlt%3e 

I'm asking for your vote to approve this release.

[ ] +1 Approve the release as Apache Lucene.Net 2.0.0 build 003 incubating [
] -1 Veto this release (explain why so it can be addressed)

Regards,

-- George Aroush


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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: [VOTE] [Retry] Approve the release of Apache Lucene.Net 2.0 build 004 incubating

Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.

On 3/29/07, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 28, 2007, at 2:22 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:
>
> > On 3/28/07, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
> >> Hi Robert,
> >>
> >> Thanks for taking your time and looking at this release.  To
> >> answer your
> >> questions:
> >>
> >> The files *.csproj, and *.sln are the Visual Studio.NET project
> >> files --
> >> those are auto generated and thus I can't edit them outside the
> >> IDE -- the
> >> same goes to the few *.cs files that you noticed as well as the
> >> few *.xml
> >> and *.html files that you highlighted.
> >
> > yeh
> >
> > IMHO it's pretty naffy that you can't add headers but that's life, i
> > suppose - or at least m$
> >
> >> For the file,
> >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/trunk/C%23/
> >> contrib/Snowball.Net/Test/Analysis/Snowball/TestSnowball.cs where
> >> you pointed out the use of the old style Apache License, it looks
> >> like
> >> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-update-scripts
> >> didn't do the job well here.  This is an original work -- will
> >> this issue prevent a release?.
> >
> > different people have different opinions :-/
> >
> > (hopefully people will jump in here)
>
> Thanks for the invitation. ;-)
>
> Projects without authorship of files should not be in the business of
> changing other projects' licenses.

in general, yes

but AIUI the document in question is a port of a jakarta lucene
original. the original is covered by a CLA as were the changes. if
this is the case, the whole is covered by a CLA AIUI and the license
can be upgrade from 1.1 to 2.0.

> It seems to me that if the file in question has not been kept current
> with the latest Apache copyright notice, then the only thing that you
> can do is to leave it intact. If there is a later version of the same
> file with the Apache V2 license, I'd strongly encourage you to
> replace the older version. [That way, you don't have to keep
> answering the same questions.]

if it's an original work created for apache covered by a CLA then the
license can be upgraded. AIUI this is true in this case.

> But I see nothing wrong with distributing a file in either source or
> binary form that plainly states that it is licensed under Apache v1.1.

in this case it should be noted in the NOTICE and licensed in the
LICENSE. AIUI it is not.

- robert

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] [Retry] Approve the release of Apache Lucene.Net 2.0 build 004 incubating

Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.

On Mar 28, 2007, at 2:22 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote:

> On 3/28/07, George Aroush <ge...@aroush.net> wrote:
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> Thanks for taking your time and looking at this release.  To  
>> answer your
>> questions:
>>
>> The files *.csproj, and *.sln are the Visual Studio.NET project  
>> files --
>> those are auto generated and thus I can't edit them outside the  
>> IDE -- the
>> same goes to the few *.cs files that you noticed as well as the  
>> few *.xml
>> and *.html files that you highlighted.
>
> yeh
>
> IMHO it's pretty naffy that you can't add headers but that's life, i
> suppose - or at least m$
>
>> For the file,
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/lucene.net/trunk/C%23/ 
>> contrib/Snowball.Net/Test/Analysis/Snowball/TestSnowball.cs where  
>> you pointed out the use of the old style Apache License, it looks  
>> like
>> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-update-scripts  
>> didn't do the job well here.  This is an original work -- will  
>> this issue prevent a release?.
>
> different people have different opinions :-/
>
> (hopefully people will jump in here)

Thanks for the invitation. ;-)

Projects without authorship of files should not be in the business of  
changing other projects' licenses.

It seems to me that if the file in question has not been kept current  
with the latest Apache copyright notice, then the only thing that you  
can do is to leave it intact. If there is a later version of the same  
file with the Apache V2 license, I'd strongly encourage you to  
replace the older version. [That way, you don't have to keep  
answering the same questions.]

But I see nothing wrong with distributing a file in either source or  
binary form that plainly states that it is licensed under Apache v1.1.

Craig
>
> IMHO it's a judgment call. i wouldn't cut a release with any header
> issues of this kind but i wouldn't -1 one either.
>
> RAT is good at catching this kind of issue (though it will pick up a
> lot of false negatives  for the XML and HTML files)
>
>> Thanks for catching the grammatical error in the README.txt: "An  
>> MADN ..."
>> I fixed it in the SVN release.
>>
>> Again, thanks for taking your time and looking at this release  
>> candidate.
>> Please let me know if I addressed all of your questions and if I  
>> get your +1
>> or -1 vote.
>
> +0 due to old license
>
> (but i feel a little bad about it)
>
> - robert
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

Re: [VOTE] [Retry] Approve the release of Apache Lucene.Net 2.0 build 004 incubating

Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.

On Wednesday 11 April 2007 10:54, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> Personally, I think the project is suffering from a chicken-egg problem.
> Without releases no users, without users no developers, without developers
> no releases.

I also think that the advice recently given to FtpServer project (also a 
single developer) should be assimilated with great care for Lucene.Net.

Without furthering the community, the project will never graduate. And right 
now, even voting in new committers will be painful.

I suggest that you approach;
 a. Other committers in ASF that are or has been doing dotNet development.
 b. Lucene users. Many developers jump between Java and dotNet, and some of
    those may not know of Lucene.Net.


Cheers
-- 
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer

I  live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I  work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] [Retry] Approve the release of Apache Lucene.Net 2.0 build 004 incubating

Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.

Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> 
> Personally, I think the project is suffering from a chicken-egg problem. 
> Without releases no users, without users no developers, without developers no 
> releases.
> Somehow it also feels to me that either dotNet has no credibility at ASF, or 
> that ASF has no credibility for dotNet development. So few efforts are 
> started, and even fewer get some momentum.

Unfortunately (speaking here as the developer of mod_aspdotnet) there are
plenty of users to be found, but I found very little development.  In spite
of persistent calls that 'this code will hit the road without oversight'
we never attracted more than a patch or two from a single coder, and were
never able to gain traction.

The upshot is that it has exited the ASF and now lives as a one-man-show
at sourceforge (where it still has a significant number of users).  Is it
a cultural difference of .NET development?  Perhaps.  Hard to name any
projects beyond mono with a wide committer base.

Of course Apache Lucene.Net doesn't have the ms-specific tie in, so one
hopes this will change.  But I wouldn't bank on your eggs hatching from
a release, since there are users out there, but they may or may not xlate
into developer/contributors.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [[RESULT] (was: RE: [VOTE] [Retry] Approve the release of Apache Lucene.Net 2.0 build 004 incubating)

Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.

On Sunday 22 April 2007 20:44, George Aroush wrote:

> Speaking of which, where is the office place to upload the release artifact
> to and what is the official mailing list to make the announcement?  Is
> there an ASF document I can read to learn all about this?

Check http://www.apache.org/dev/#releases first.


Cheers
-- 
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer

I  live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I  work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org