You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@taverna.apache.org by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> on 2016/06/01 11:03:17 UTC
[DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Use this thread to discuss the release candidate proposed in
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/Z320lz77ps9xnov
Please reply on the corresponding [VOTE] thread to place votes.
Anyone can participate in testing and voting, not just committers,
please feel free to try out the release candidate and provide your
votes!
How to review a release? https://s.apache.org/review-release
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>.
Yes, I think we can do the package.html file headers after the release.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 7:27 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 4 June 2016 at 17:30, Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for the explanations, Stian. A vote-email script might not be a
> bad
> > idea! It certainly
> > seems to be a complicated thing to pull together.
> >
> > In response to Stian's email, I found some additional, related ASF
> > resources that support not
> > requiring license headers in files whose content cannot be copyrighted
> > (e.g., files that contain
> > "Hello"). Here is the link:
> > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions
> >
> > The exception also applies to "Test data for which the addition of a
> source
> > header would cause
> > the tests to fail."
> >
> > It seems that most of the files that currently do not have license
> headers,
> > including
> > files in the services sub-directories, meet the criteria of being exempt
> > from the license header
> > requirement.
>
> Ah, great. So we're generally good to go with those test files then,
> and can just list them in the apache-rat excludes - which I think is a
> good way to say "Yeah, we know about this file, 's fine".
>
>
> > However, it sounds like we SHOULD add license headers to the
> > package.html files.
> > Do we want to do that way now, and then later convert to
> > package-info.java files?
>
> Just convert them right away, I think.. it's generally just rename and
> add the ASF header and the Java "package " line.
>
> The only tricky thing about them is that you need to use the two
> different Java comment blocks carefully so that the ASF header does
> not become the JAvadoc, that is
>
> src/main/java/org/apache/taverna/foo/package-info.java
>
> /* ASF */
> /** javadoc for this package **/
> package org.apache.taverna.foo;
>
> And we should have such package info for all API-like packages at
> least.. like in all the *-api bits in taverna-engine. (It might just
> have a one-liner with the description from README)
>
>
> Shall we do this after this release?
>
>
>
> > I also found an ASF link that confirms what Stian said about only BUNDLED
> > dependencies
> > needing to be included in NOTICE files. Good to know.
> > (http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundled-vs-non-bundled)
>
> Yes - so bundled would be when we make a binaries/ upload.
>
> Not sure if this also covers any bundling in Maven Central - e.g.
>
>
> http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/taverna/language/taverna-tavlang-tool/0.15.1-incubating/taverna-tavlang-tool-0.15.1-incubating.jar
> includes bundled JARs, but the Maven plugins seem to have managed to
> combine the contained META-INF/NOTICE. (Thanks, Menaka)
>
>
>
> > Also, regarding 3rd party copyrighted works: I found an ASF link that
> > explicitly states:
> > -- not to modify/remove copyright headers from 3rd party works;
> > -- not to add the standard ASF license header to 3rd party works.
> > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
>
> OK, so we'll leave those BSD copyrights in place in say the
> taverna-engine hadoop crossproduct.java
>
>
> > One remaining question about 3rd party license in
> > src/license/THIRD-PARTY.properties:
> >
> > javax.transaction--com.springsource.javax.transaction--1.1.0 (CDDL
> 1.0)
> >
> > Is this an exception to the category-b license "binary only" rule
> because
> > we use only
> > a small amount of source code?
>
> But it's not included - we don't distribute javax.transaction in the
> source archive; it's downloaded from Maven repositories. You won't
> see it until you have built the commandline product:
>
> Directory of
> D:\src\apache-taverna-commandline-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-commandline-product\target\apache-taverna-commandline-3.1.0-incubating\lib\javax.transaction
>
> 2016-06-06 14:10 <DIR> .
> 2016-06-06 14:10 <DIR> ..
> 2016-05-31 16:23 15,518
> com.springsource.javax.transaction-1.1.0.jar
>
> (or look in ~/.m2/repository/javax/transaction)
>
> > One observation about headers in JSON files
> > Most of the JSON files have the header you described (
> http://purl.org.
> > ..).
>
> Yeah.. some kind of JSON-LD-like workaround -- the key is unlikely to
> be used for anything but for licenses - and generally JSON consumers
> ignore extra keys.
>
>
> > Is it okay if the JSON file header uses ##? (See below).
> >
> >
> taverna-activity-archetype\src\main\resources\archetype-resource
> >
> \__rootArtifactId__-activity\src\main\resources\schema.json
>
> No, there are no valid comment characters in JSON. The Jackson JSON
> parser might be configurable to accept # though - but I don't think we
> want to rely on that.
>
> The resource above has ## comments because it's a Velocity template
> for generating schema.json in the archetype - the generated file in
> the user's plugin should NOT inherit that ASF header, as they might or
> might not want to choose to license their plugin under the ASF
> license.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
On 4 June 2016 at 17:30, Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the explanations, Stian. A vote-email script might not be a bad
> idea! It certainly
> seems to be a complicated thing to pull together.
>
> In response to Stian's email, I found some additional, related ASF
> resources that support not
> requiring license headers in files whose content cannot be copyrighted
> (e.g., files that contain
> "Hello"). Here is the link:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions
>
> The exception also applies to "Test data for which the addition of a source
> header would cause
> the tests to fail."
>
> It seems that most of the files that currently do not have license headers,
> including
> files in the services sub-directories, meet the criteria of being exempt
> from the license header
> requirement.
Ah, great. So we're generally good to go with those test files then,
and can just list them in the apache-rat excludes - which I think is a
good way to say "Yeah, we know about this file, 's fine".
> However, it sounds like we SHOULD add license headers to the
> package.html files.
> Do we want to do that way now, and then later convert to
> package-info.java files?
Just convert them right away, I think.. it's generally just rename and
add the ASF header and the Java "package " line.
The only tricky thing about them is that you need to use the two
different Java comment blocks carefully so that the ASF header does
not become the JAvadoc, that is
src/main/java/org/apache/taverna/foo/package-info.java
/* ASF */
/** javadoc for this package **/
package org.apache.taverna.foo;
And we should have such package info for all API-like packages at
least.. like in all the *-api bits in taverna-engine. (It might just
have a one-liner with the description from README)
Shall we do this after this release?
> I also found an ASF link that confirms what Stian said about only BUNDLED
> dependencies
> needing to be included in NOTICE files. Good to know.
> (http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundled-vs-non-bundled)
Yes - so bundled would be when we make a binaries/ upload.
Not sure if this also covers any bundling in Maven Central - e.g.
http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/taverna/language/taverna-tavlang-tool/0.15.1-incubating/taverna-tavlang-tool-0.15.1-incubating.jar
includes bundled JARs, but the Maven plugins seem to have managed to
combine the contained META-INF/NOTICE. (Thanks, Menaka)
> Also, regarding 3rd party copyrighted works: I found an ASF link that
> explicitly states:
> -- not to modify/remove copyright headers from 3rd party works;
> -- not to add the standard ASF license header to 3rd party works.
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
OK, so we'll leave those BSD copyrights in place in say the
taverna-engine hadoop crossproduct.java
> One remaining question about 3rd party license in
> src/license/THIRD-PARTY.properties:
>
> javax.transaction--com.springsource.javax.transaction--1.1.0 (CDDL 1.0)
>
> Is this an exception to the category-b license "binary only" rule because
> we use only
> a small amount of source code?
But it's not included - we don't distribute javax.transaction in the
source archive; it's downloaded from Maven repositories. You won't
see it until you have built the commandline product:
Directory of D:\src\apache-taverna-commandline-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-commandline-product\target\apache-taverna-commandline-3.1.0-incubating\lib\javax.transaction
2016-06-06 14:10 <DIR> .
2016-06-06 14:10 <DIR> ..
2016-05-31 16:23 15,518 com.springsource.javax.transaction-1.1.0.jar
(or look in ~/.m2/repository/javax/transaction)
> One observation about headers in JSON files
> Most of the JSON files have the header you described (http://purl.org.
> ..).
Yeah.. some kind of JSON-LD-like workaround -- the key is unlikely to
be used for anything but for licenses - and generally JSON consumers
ignore extra keys.
> Is it okay if the JSON file header uses ##? (See below).
>
> taverna-activity-archetype\src\main\resources\archetype-resource
> \__rootArtifactId__-activity\src\main\resources\schema.json
No, there are no valid comment characters in JSON. The Jackson JSON
parser might be configurable to accept # though - but I don't think we
want to rely on that.
The resource above has ## comments because it's a Velocity template
for generating schema.json in the archetype - the generated file in
the user's plugin should NOT inherit that ASF header, as they might or
might not want to choose to license their plugin under the ASF
license.
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>.
Thanks for the explanations, Stian. A vote-email script might not be a bad
idea! It certainly
seems to be a complicated thing to pull together.
In response to Stian's email, I found some additional, related ASF
resources that support not
requiring license headers in files whose content cannot be copyrighted
(e.g., files that contain
"Hello"). Here is the link:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions
The exception also applies to "Test data for which the addition of a source
header would cause
the tests to fail."
It seems that most of the files that currently do not have license headers,
including
files in the services sub-directories, meet the criteria of being exempt
from the license header
requirement.
----------------
However, it sounds like we SHOULD add license headers to the
package.html files.
Do we want to do that way now, and then later convert to
package-info.java files?
----------------
I also found an ASF link that confirms what Stian said about only BUNDLED
dependencies
needing to be included in NOTICE files. Good to know.
(http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundled-vs-non-bundled)
Also, regarding 3rd party copyrighted works: I found an ASF link that
explicitly states:
-- not to modify/remove copyright headers from 3rd party works;
-- not to add the standard ASF license header to 3rd party works.
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
One remaining question about 3rd party license in
src/license/THIRD-PARTY.properties:
javax.transaction--com.springsource.javax.transaction--1.1.0 (CDDL 1.0)
Is this an exception to the category-b license "binary only" rule because
we use only
a small amount of source code?
One observation about headers in JSON files
Most of the JSON files have the header you described (http://purl.org.
..).
Is it okay if the JSON file header uses ##? (See below).
taverna-activity-archetype\src\main\resources\archetype-resource
\__rootArtifactId__-activity\src\main\resources\schema.json
## Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under
one or more
## contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
distributed with
## this work for additional information regarding
copyright ownership.
## The ASF licenses this file to You under...
....
## See the License for the specific language governing
permissions and
## limitations under the License
Also, this statement is after the license:
## Note: Above Velocity comment should NOT be included in
generated
## code from the archetype
Just wondering what this is. Does it need to be at the end of all
License headers?
Thanks,
Gale
On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:39 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2 June 2016 at 19:50, Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com> wrote:
> > I'm so sorry - I've been replying to the VOTE thread.
> >
> > I'll copy my comments here:
> >
> > ------------------------------------------
> > UP-FRONT CHECKS
> > ------------------------------------------
> > The MD5 checksums in the [VOTE] email are the same as the SHA1 checksums.
> > I'm using the downloaded MD5 and SHA-1.
>
> Yes, I copy-pasted wrong! :(
>
> db4309131f4330832736586f6357d691
> apache-taverna-commandline-3.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> 03c62e8d0d8a8862638655a3591597ba
> apache-taverna-common-activities-2.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
> 8113656bf4ac8ed4e5ed88cb1b0da15d
> apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
>
>
> (Perhaps we need a vote-email script!
>
> > -------------------
> > GNU License?
> >
> > The list of # Already used licenses in project : includes
> >
> > # - GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1
> > Isn't this a category-x license? (It doesn't show up in the
> > "Please fill in the missing licenses" list at the bottom of the file.)
>
> I assume you mean
> apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating/src/license/THIRD-PARTY.properties
>
> which is used if you run manually:
>
> mvn license:aggregate-add-third-party
>
>
> http://www.mojohaus.org/license-maven-plugin/aggregate-add-third-party-mojo.html
>
> which will generate
>
> target/generated-sources/license/THIRD-PARTY.txt
>
> based on the <dependencies> and transitive dependencies.
>
>
> Usually the plugin picks up license info from the POM <licenses>
> section, but some projects don't provide that, in which case the
> properties file can fill in the blanks.
>
> The "Already used" section is written by the plugin if you use
> -Dlicense.useMissingFile=true
>
>
> But all the LGPL licenses in the report are dual-licensed also as
> Apache license:
>
> stain@biggiebuntu:~/rc/dist/test/apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating$
> grep GNU target/generated-sources/license/THIRD-PARTY.txt
> (GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
> Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-annotations
> (com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotations:2.2.2 -
> http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
> (GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
> Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-annotations
> (com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotations:2.3.0 -
> http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
> (GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
> Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-annotations
> (com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotations:2.3.3 -
> http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
> (GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
> Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-core
> (com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core:2.2.2 -
> http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
> (GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
> Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-core
> (com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core:2.3.3 -
> http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
> (GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
> Software License, Version 2.0) jackson-databind
> (com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind:2.2.2 -
> http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
> (GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
> Software License, Version 2.0) jackson-databind
> (com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind:2.3.3 -
> http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
>
>
>
> >
> > -------------------
> > Missing license information:
> >
> > # http://x-stream.github.io/license.html - this link says BSD (but not
> > which type);
> > should this copyright be included in our Notice file?
>
> Not in our NOTICE file yet, as we don't bundle the x-stream library,
> we just depend on it.
>
> But we would need to include that (and much more) in the NOTICE of the
> ZIP-file from taverna-commandline-product when/if we decide to
> distribute that as a binary release.
>
>
> > org.aopalliance--com.springsource.org.aopalliance--1.0.0 - no license
> > listed
>
> Should be clean:
>
> http://aopalliance.sourceforge.net/
>
> > LICENCE: all the source code provided by AOP Alliance is Public Domain.
>
> (Oh my, that dependency is more than 12 years old..!)
>
>
>
> > # https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/blob/jdom-1.1/core/LICENSE.txt -
> > this link has a copyright;
> > include in Notice file? What do we use for "type" of license?
> "Copyright?"
> > Or is this also a "JDOM License" like
> > org.jdom--com.springsource.org.jdom--1.1.0?
>
> I think we can just call it the "JDOM license". Same as above, no
> need for NOTICE as we don't bundle the JAR.
>
> > # http://www.xmlpull.org/ - no license listed
>
>
>
> > Aren't the following licenses listed under category-b, binary release
> only?
>
> But we only have <dependency> on them, they are not distributed by ASF
> (you won't find these dependencies in our source archive), so that is
> OK.
>
>
>
> > 1) University of Manchester copyright in taverna-provenanceconnector
> > files (see previous email).
>
> Bah! Well spotted! Danger of just disabling a Maven module!
>
> That is however an (appearant) violation as it claims to be under
> incompatible LGPL license -- that code was however covered by the
> software grant and should have ASF headers.
>
> I think we might have to pull the RC for this (we could get it through
> the incubator if it was the first release, but this is our third!).
>
>
>
> > 2) taverna-execution-hadoop Crossproduct.java file contains copyright
> > by Adam Pingel and no ASF license.
> >
> > I know this is copyright is included in the top level NOTICE
> > file, but doesn't it have to be removed from the Java file?
>
> Strictly speaking we don't need to include that text in the NOTICE if
> it is also in the file header, however we need it in the NOTICE so
> that it also comes along in JARs in Maven Central.
>
> I don't think we can move this away from the file header, as then
> downstream consumers who decide to copy that file might then easily
> violate:
>
> > Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
> > notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
>
>
> > 1) Two README files without license headers:
> > /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-prov/README.md
> > /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-reference-types/README.md
>
> I think it should be added - but personally I wouldn't block the
> release for that alone.
>
>
> > 2) One JSON file without license header
> > /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-run-impl/src/test/resources/workflowrun.json
>
> It's tricky to add to JSON as it has no comment headers, but it's
> possible to add something like this:
>
>
> "http://purl.org/dc/terms/rights": "Licensed to the Apache Software
> Foundation (ASF) under one or more contributor license agreements.
> See the NOTICE file distributed with this work for additional
> information regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the 'License'); you may
> not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may
> obtain a copy of the License at
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 Unless required by
> applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the
> License is distributed on an 'AS IS' BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR
> Cse": {"@id": "http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0"},
> ONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for
> the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the
> License.",
> "http://purl.org/dc/terms/licen
>
> > 3) Miscellaneous text and html files don't have a license header.
> > (Also spring.handlers and spring.schemas.)
> > Are these not considered "code?"
>
> Not having checked deeper, but I think the spring.* files can't have
> license headers. (They don't even have a newline!)
>
> The spring-files are very small and not copyrightable (does not
> achieve Work height) - so it's not a big issue they are missing
> headers.
>
> The HTML files should have license headers. Also I think it's cleaner
> to use package-info.java with regular Javadoc instead of package.html
>
>
> > Examples:
> > taverna-activity-archetype...goal.txt,
> > taverna-credential-manager...text.html,
> > taverna-prov...3a/3a82e39d-a537-40cf-91a0-2c89d4a2e62b.txt
> > taverna-prov...greeting.txt
> > taverna-prov...mimetype
> > taverna-workflowmodel-impl...package.html
> > taverna-reference-impl...spring.handlers (and spring.schemas)
>
> Most of these are test resources which must match 1:1 -
> documented in the RAT exclusions of pom.xml:
>
> <exclude>**/*.txt</exclude> <!-- workflow values
> -->
>
> <exclude>**/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/</exclude> <!--
> Don't want our archetype to generate ASF headers -->
> <exclude>**/META-INF/spring.*</exclude> <!--
> Miniscule spring marker files -->
> <exclude>**/workflowrun.json</exclude> <!--
> example workflow run report -->
>
>
> > 4) Files in services subdirectories also do not have a license headers.
> Are
> > they exempt?
> >
> > Examples:
> > taverna-credential-manager...services/
> > org.apache.taverna.security.credentialmanager.CredentialProviderSPI
> > taverna-dataflow-activity.../services/
> > net.sf.taverna.t2.workflowmodel.health.HealthChecker
>
> They are also very small (just listing classnames) and so would not be
> copyrightable. However they would support a ## style copyright header
> which we can add.
>
>
>
> Thanks for a thorough check!
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
On 2 June 2016 at 19:50, Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com> wrote:
> I'm so sorry - I've been replying to the VOTE thread.
>
> I'll copy my comments here:
>
> ------------------------------------------
> UP-FRONT CHECKS
> ------------------------------------------
> The MD5 checksums in the [VOTE] email are the same as the SHA1 checksums.
> I'm using the downloaded MD5 and SHA-1.
Yes, I copy-pasted wrong! :(
db4309131f4330832736586f6357d691
apache-taverna-commandline-3.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
03c62e8d0d8a8862638655a3591597ba
apache-taverna-common-activities-2.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
8113656bf4ac8ed4e5ed88cb1b0da15d
apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release.zip
(Perhaps we need a vote-email script!
> -------------------
> GNU License?
>
> The list of # Already used licenses in project : includes
>
> # - GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1
> Isn't this a category-x license? (It doesn't show up in the
> "Please fill in the missing licenses" list at the bottom of the file.)
I assume you mean
apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating/src/license/THIRD-PARTY.properties
which is used if you run manually:
mvn license:aggregate-add-third-party
http://www.mojohaus.org/license-maven-plugin/aggregate-add-third-party-mojo.html
which will generate
target/generated-sources/license/THIRD-PARTY.txt
based on the <dependencies> and transitive dependencies.
Usually the plugin picks up license info from the POM <licenses>
section, but some projects don't provide that, in which case the
properties file can fill in the blanks.
The "Already used" section is written by the plugin if you use
-Dlicense.useMissingFile=true
But all the LGPL licenses in the report are dual-licensed also as
Apache license:
stain@biggiebuntu:~/rc/dist/test/apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating$
grep GNU target/generated-sources/license/THIRD-PARTY.txt
(GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-annotations
(com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotations:2.2.2 -
http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
(GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-annotations
(com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotations:2.3.0 -
http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
(GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-annotations
(com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-annotations:2.3.3 -
http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
(GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-core
(com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core:2.2.2 -
http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
(GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
Software License, Version 2.0) Jackson-core
(com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-core:2.3.3 -
http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
(GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
Software License, Version 2.0) jackson-databind
(com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind:2.2.2 -
http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
(GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1) (The Apache
Software License, Version 2.0) jackson-databind
(com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind:2.3.3 -
http://wiki.fasterxml.com/JacksonHome)
>
> -------------------
> Missing license information:
>
> # http://x-stream.github.io/license.html - this link says BSD (but not
> which type);
> should this copyright be included in our Notice file?
Not in our NOTICE file yet, as we don't bundle the x-stream library,
we just depend on it.
But we would need to include that (and much more) in the NOTICE of the
ZIP-file from taverna-commandline-product when/if we decide to
distribute that as a binary release.
> org.aopalliance--com.springsource.org.aopalliance--1.0.0 - no license
> listed
Should be clean:
http://aopalliance.sourceforge.net/
> LICENCE: all the source code provided by AOP Alliance is Public Domain.
(Oh my, that dependency is more than 12 years old..!)
> # https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/blob/jdom-1.1/core/LICENSE.txt -
> this link has a copyright;
> include in Notice file? What do we use for "type" of license? "Copyright?"
> Or is this also a "JDOM License" like
> org.jdom--com.springsource.org.jdom--1.1.0?
I think we can just call it the "JDOM license". Same as above, no
need for NOTICE as we don't bundle the JAR.
> # http://www.xmlpull.org/ - no license listed
> Aren't the following licenses listed under category-b, binary release only?
But we only have <dependency> on them, they are not distributed by ASF
(you won't find these dependencies in our source archive), so that is
OK.
> 1) University of Manchester copyright in taverna-provenanceconnector
> files (see previous email).
Bah! Well spotted! Danger of just disabling a Maven module!
That is however an (appearant) violation as it claims to be under
incompatible LGPL license -- that code was however covered by the
software grant and should have ASF headers.
I think we might have to pull the RC for this (we could get it through
the incubator if it was the first release, but this is our third!).
> 2) taverna-execution-hadoop Crossproduct.java file contains copyright
> by Adam Pingel and no ASF license.
>
> I know this is copyright is included in the top level NOTICE
> file, but doesn't it have to be removed from the Java file?
Strictly speaking we don't need to include that text in the NOTICE if
it is also in the file header, however we need it in the NOTICE so
that it also comes along in JARs in Maven Central.
I don't think we can move this away from the file header, as then
downstream consumers who decide to copy that file might then easily
violate:
> Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
> notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
> 1) Two README files without license headers:
> /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-prov/README.md
> /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-reference-types/README.md
I think it should be added - but personally I wouldn't block the
release for that alone.
> 2) One JSON file without license header
> /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-run-impl/src/test/resources/workflowrun.json
It's tricky to add to JSON as it has no comment headers, but it's
possible to add something like this:
"http://purl.org/dc/terms/rights": "Licensed to the Apache Software
Foundation (ASF) under one or more contributor license agreements.
See the NOTICE file distributed with this work for additional
information regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the 'License'); you may
not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may
obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 Unless required by
applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the
License is distributed on an 'AS IS' BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR
Cse": {"@id": "http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0"},
ONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for
the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the
License.",
"http://purl.org/dc/terms/licen
> 3) Miscellaneous text and html files don't have a license header.
> (Also spring.handlers and spring.schemas.)
> Are these not considered "code?"
Not having checked deeper, but I think the spring.* files can't have
license headers. (They don't even have a newline!)
The spring-files are very small and not copyrightable (does not
achieve Work height) - so it's not a big issue they are missing
headers.
The HTML files should have license headers. Also I think it's cleaner
to use package-info.java with regular Javadoc instead of package.html
> Examples:
> taverna-activity-archetype...goal.txt,
> taverna-credential-manager...text.html,
> taverna-prov...3a/3a82e39d-a537-40cf-91a0-2c89d4a2e62b.txt
> taverna-prov...greeting.txt
> taverna-prov...mimetype
> taverna-workflowmodel-impl...package.html
> taverna-reference-impl...spring.handlers (and spring.schemas)
Most of these are test resources which must match 1:1 -
documented in the RAT exclusions of pom.xml:
<exclude>**/*.txt</exclude> <!-- workflow values -->
<exclude>**/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/</exclude> <!--
Don't want our archetype to generate ASF headers -->
<exclude>**/META-INF/spring.*</exclude> <!--
Miniscule spring marker files -->
<exclude>**/workflowrun.json</exclude> <!--
example workflow run report -->
> 4) Files in services subdirectories also do not have a license headers. Are
> they exempt?
>
> Examples:
> taverna-credential-manager...services/
> org.apache.taverna.security.credentialmanager.CredentialProviderSPI
> taverna-dataflow-activity.../services/
> net.sf.taverna.t2.workflowmodel.health.HealthChecker
They are also very small (just listing classnames) and so would not be
copyrightable. However they would support a ## style copyright header
which we can add.
Thanks for a thorough check!
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>.
Taverna Engine Build Sucess!
Warnings Summary (see details below):
(1) org.apache.taverna.workflowmodel.impl has a private reference
(2) Unused Import-Package instructions: [org.springframework.orm.*]
(3) Some problems were encountered while building the effective model for
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin-plugin:taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT
(Info/Warning)
(4) org.springframework:org.springframework.context:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies: (Info/Warning)
Plus Javadoc warnings.
Warnings Details:
(1)
[WARNING] Bundle
org.apache.taverna.engine:taverna-workflowmodel-impl:bundle:3.1.0-incubating
: Export org.apache.taverna.workflowmodel.impl, has 1, private references
[org.apache.taverna.workflowmodel.processor.dispatch.impl],
(2)
[WARNING] Bundle
org.apache.taverna.engine:taverna-reference-impl:bundle:3.1.0-incubating :
Unused Import-Package instructions: [org.springframework.orm.*]
(3)
[INFO] [WARNING]
[INFO] [WARNING] Some problems were encountered while building the
effective model for
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin-plugin:taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin is missing. @
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT,
C:\src\_E_\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-inc\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\pom.xml,
line 22, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin is missing. @
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT,
C:\src\_E_\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-inc\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\pom.xml,
line 50, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin is missing. @
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT,
C:\src\_E_\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-inc\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\pom.xml,
line 40, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin is missing. @
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT,
C:\src\_E_\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-inc\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\pom.xml,
line 29, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING]
[INFO] [WARNING] Some problems were encountered while building the
effective model for
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin-activity:bundle:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin is missing. @
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT,
C:\src\_E_\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-inc\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\pom.xml,
line 22, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin is missing. @
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT,
C:\src\_E_\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-inc\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\pom.xml,
line 50, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin is missing. @
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT,
C:\src\_E_\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-inc\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\pom.xml,
line 40, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin is missing. @
com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT,
C:\src\_E_\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-inc\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\pom.xml,
line 29, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING]
[INFO] [WARNING] Some problems were encountered while building the
effective model for com.example:dummy-taverna-plugin:pom:0.1.0-SNAPSHOT
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin is missing. @ line 22,
column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin is missing. @ line 50,
column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-jar-plugin is missing. @ line 40, column 12
[INFO] [WARNING] 'build.plugins.plugin.version' for
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-source-plugin is missing. @ line 29, column
12
[INFO] [WARNING]
[INFO] [WARNING] It is highly recommended to fix these problems because
they threaten the stability of your build.
[INFO] [WARNING]
[INFO] [WARNING] For this reason, future Maven versions might no longer
support building such malformed projects.
[INFO] [WARNING]
(4)
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.context:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.aop:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.beans:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.core:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.transaction:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Not an OSGi bundle : junit:junit:jar:4.4
[INFO] [INFO]
[INFO] [INFO] ---
taverna-maven-plugin:0.2.1-incubating:plugin-prepare-bundles
(default-plugin-prepare-bundles) @ dummy-taverna-plugin-plugin ---
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.context:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.aop:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.beans:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.core:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Bundle :
org.springframework:org.springframework.transaction:jar:3.0.5.RELEASE has
unresolved package dependencies:
[INFO] [WARNING] org.apache.commons.logging;version="[1.1.1,2.0.0)"
[INFO] [WARNING] Not an OSGi bundle : junit:junit:jar:4.4
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 11:50 AM Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>
wrote:
> I'm so sorry - I've been replying to the VOTE thread.
>
> I'll copy my comments here:
>
> ------------------------------------------
> UP-FRONT CHECKS
> ------------------------------------------
> The MD5 checksums in the [VOTE] email are the same as the SHA1 checksums.
> I'm using the downloaded MD5 and SHA-1.
>
> (Originally I missed the commit IDs in the Vote email - don't know how -
> but they are there.)
>
>
> ------------------------------------------
> LICENSES - THIRD-PARTY.properties file
> ------------------------------------------
>
> -------------------
> GNU License?
>
> The list of # Already used licenses in project : includes
>
> # - GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1
> Isn't this a category-x license? (It doesn't show up in the
> "Please fill in the missing licenses" list at the bottom of the file.)
>
>
> -------------------
> Missing license information:
>
> # http://x-stream.github.io/license.html - this link says BSD (but not
> which type);
> should this copyright be included in our Notice file?
>
> org.aopalliance--com.springsource.org.aopalliance--1.0.0 - no license
> listed
>
> # https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/blob/jdom-1.1/core/LICENSE.txt -
> this link has a copyright;
> include in Notice file? What do we use for "type" of license? "Copyright?"
> Or is this also a "JDOM License" like
> org.jdom--com.springsource.org.jdom--1.1.0?
>
> # http://www.xmlpull.org/ - no license listed
>
>
> -------------------
> Category B licenses?
>
> Aren't the following licenses listed under category-b, binary release
> only? Or do they meet the exception
> for allowing in a source release? ("For small amounts of source that is
> directly
> consumed by the ASF product at runtime in source form, and for which that
> source is unmodified and unlikely to be changed ...")
>
> javax.transaction--com.springsource.javax.transaction--1.1.0 - CDDL 1.0
>
> org.aspectj--com.springsource.org.aspectj.runtime--1.6.0 - Eclipse Public
> License 1.0
> org.aspectj--com.springsource.org.aspectj.weaver--1.6.0 - Eclipse Public
> License 1.0
>
>
> -------------------
> Source File Headers
> -------------------
>
> -------------------
> Non-ASF Copyrights
>
>
> 1) University of Manchester copyright in taverna-provenanceconnector
> files (see previous email).
>
> 2) taverna-execution-hadoop Crossproduct.java file contains copyright
> by Adam Pingel and no ASF license.
>
> I know this is copyright is included in the top level NOTICE
> file, but doesn't it have to be removed from the Java file?
>
>
> -------------------
> Missing ASF licenses?
>
>
> 1) Two README files without license headers:
>
> /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-prov/README.md
> /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-reference-types/README.md
>
>
> 2) One JSON file without license header
>
> /taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-run-impl/src/test/resources/workflowrun.json
>
>
> 3) Miscellaneous text and html files don't have a license header.
> (Also spring.handlers and spring.schemas.)
> Are these not considered "code?"
>
> Examples:
> taverna-activity-archetype...goal.txt,
> taverna-credential-manager...text.html,
> taverna-prov...3a/3a82e39d-a537-40cf-91a0-2c89d4a2e62b.txt
> taverna-prov...greeting.txt
> taverna-prov...mimetype
> taverna-workflowmodel-impl...package.html
> taverna-reference-impl...spring.handlers (and spring.schemas)
>
>
> 4) Files in services subdirectories also do not have a license headers.
> Are they exempt?
>
> Examples:
> taverna-credential-manager...services/
> org.apache.taverna.security.credentialmanager.CredentialProviderSPI
> taverna-dataflow-activity.../services/
> net.sf.taverna.t2.workflowmodel.health.HealthChecker
>
>
> Gale
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:21 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Great! Yes, the long one sounds like trouble..
>>
>> The README says:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-engine/#building-on-windows
>>
>> > If you are building on Windows, ensure you unpack this source code to a
>> folder with a short path name lenght, e.g. C:\src - as Windows has a
>> limitation on the total path length which might otherwise prevent this code
>> from building successfully.
>>
>> I tested mine as D:\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\ which just
>> about worked.
>>
>> I am not sure if Maven could detect this in advance somehow, perhaps
>> something to ask on dev@maven.. (I'll ask)
>>
>>
>> On 1 June 2016 at 13:18, Alan Williams <al...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > On 01-Jun-16 12:27, Alan Williams wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hello
>> >>
>> >> I get a failure:
>> >>
>> >> [INFO] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>> >> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:test
>> >> (default-test) on project dummy-taverna-plugin-activity: Execution
>> >> default-test of goal
>> >> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:t
>> >> est failed: The forked VM terminated without properly saying goodbye.
>> VM
>> >> crash or System.exit called?
>> >> [INFO] [ERROR] Command was cmd.exe /X /C ""C:\Program
>> >> Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_51\jre\bin\java" -jar
>> >>
>> >>
>> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefirebooter1896791380795738239.jar
>> >> C:\Us
>> >>
>> >>
>> ers\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire5943729575219558115tmp
>> >>
>> >>
>> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire_0317696432267187850tmp"
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Is that the path length limit problem?
>> >
>> >
>> > It built OK when I just had it under C:\engine instead of
>> >
>> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating
>> >
>> >> Alan
>> >
>> >
>> > Alan
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
>> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Gale Naylor <Ga...@noventussolutions.com>.
I'm so sorry - I've been replying to the VOTE thread.
I'll copy my comments here:
------------------------------------------
UP-FRONT CHECKS
------------------------------------------
The MD5 checksums in the [VOTE] email are the same as the SHA1 checksums.
I'm using the downloaded MD5 and SHA-1.
(Originally I missed the commit IDs in the Vote email - don't know how -
but they are there.)
------------------------------------------
LICENSES - THIRD-PARTY.properties file
------------------------------------------
-------------------
GNU License?
The list of # Already used licenses in project : includes
# - GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1
Isn't this a category-x license? (It doesn't show up in the
"Please fill in the missing licenses" list at the bottom of the file.)
-------------------
Missing license information:
# http://x-stream.github.io/license.html - this link says BSD (but not
which type);
should this copyright be included in our Notice file?
org.aopalliance--com.springsource.org.aopalliance--1.0.0 - no license
listed
# https://github.com/hunterhacker/jdom/blob/jdom-1.1/core/LICENSE.txt -
this link has a copyright;
include in Notice file? What do we use for "type" of license? "Copyright?"
Or is this also a "JDOM License" like
org.jdom--com.springsource.org.jdom--1.1.0?
# http://www.xmlpull.org/ - no license listed
-------------------
Category B licenses?
Aren't the following licenses listed under category-b, binary release only?
Or do they meet the exception
for allowing in a source release? ("For small amounts of source that is
directly
consumed by the ASF product at runtime in source form, and for which that
source is unmodified and unlikely to be changed ...")
javax.transaction--com.springsource.javax.transaction--1.1.0 - CDDL 1.0
org.aspectj--com.springsource.org.aspectj.runtime--1.6.0 - Eclipse Public
License 1.0
org.aspectj--com.springsource.org.aspectj.weaver--1.6.0 - Eclipse Public
License 1.0
-------------------
Source File Headers
-------------------
-------------------
Non-ASF Copyrights
1) University of Manchester copyright in taverna-provenanceconnector
files (see previous email).
2) taverna-execution-hadoop Crossproduct.java file contains copyright
by Adam Pingel and no ASF license.
I know this is copyright is included in the top level NOTICE
file, but doesn't it have to be removed from the Java file?
-------------------
Missing ASF licenses?
1) Two README files without license headers:
/taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-prov/README.md
/taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-reference-types/README.md
2) One JSON file without license header
/taverna-engine-rc2/taverna-run-impl/src/test/resources/workflowrun.json
3) Miscellaneous text and html files don't have a license header.
(Also spring.handlers and spring.schemas.)
Are these not considered "code?"
Examples:
taverna-activity-archetype...goal.txt,
taverna-credential-manager...text.html,
taverna-prov...3a/3a82e39d-a537-40cf-91a0-2c89d4a2e62b.txt
taverna-prov...greeting.txt
taverna-prov...mimetype
taverna-workflowmodel-impl...package.html
taverna-reference-impl...spring.handlers (and spring.schemas)
4) Files in services subdirectories also do not have a license headers. Are
they exempt?
Examples:
taverna-credential-manager...services/
org.apache.taverna.security.credentialmanager.CredentialProviderSPI
taverna-dataflow-activity.../services/
net.sf.taverna.t2.workflowmodel.health.HealthChecker
Gale
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:21 AM Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> Great! Yes, the long one sounds like trouble..
>
> The README says:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-engine/#building-on-windows
>
> > If you are building on Windows, ensure you unpack this source code to a
> folder with a short path name lenght, e.g. C:\src - as Windows has a
> limitation on the total path length which might otherwise prevent this code
> from building successfully.
>
> I tested mine as D:\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\ which just
> about worked.
>
> I am not sure if Maven could detect this in advance somehow, perhaps
> something to ask on dev@maven.. (I'll ask)
>
>
> On 1 June 2016 at 13:18, Alan Williams <al...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > On 01-Jun-16 12:27, Alan Williams wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> I get a failure:
> >>
> >> [INFO] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
> >> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:test
> >> (default-test) on project dummy-taverna-plugin-activity: Execution
> >> default-test of goal
> >> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:t
> >> est failed: The forked VM terminated without properly saying goodbye. VM
> >> crash or System.exit called?
> >> [INFO] [ERROR] Command was cmd.exe /X /C ""C:\Program
> >> Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_51\jre\bin\java" -jar
> >>
> >>
> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefirebooter1896791380795738239.jar
> >> C:\Us
> >>
> >>
> ers\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire5943729575219558115tmp
> >>
> >>
> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire_0317696432267187850tmp"
> >>
> >>
> >> Is that the path length limit problem?
> >
> >
> > It built OK when I just had it under C:\engine instead of
> >
> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating
> >
> >> Alan
> >
> >
> > Alan
>
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
Great! Yes, the long one sounds like trouble..
The README says:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-taverna-engine/#building-on-windows
> If you are building on Windows, ensure you unpack this source code to a folder with a short path name lenght, e.g. C:\src - as Windows has a limitation on the total path length which might otherwise prevent this code from building successfully.
I tested mine as D:\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\ which just
about worked.
I am not sure if Maven could detect this in advance somehow, perhaps
something to ask on dev@maven.. (I'll ask)
On 1 June 2016 at 13:18, Alan Williams <al...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 01-Jun-16 12:27, Alan Williams wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> I get a failure:
>>
>> [INFO] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:test
>> (default-test) on project dummy-taverna-plugin-activity: Execution
>> default-test of goal
>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:t
>> est failed: The forked VM terminated without properly saying goodbye. VM
>> crash or System.exit called?
>> [INFO] [ERROR] Command was cmd.exe /X /C ""C:\Program
>> Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_51\jre\bin\java" -jar
>>
>> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefirebooter1896791380795738239.jar
>> C:\Us
>>
>> ers\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire5943729575219558115tmp
>>
>> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire_0317696432267187850tmp"
>>
>>
>> Is that the path length limit problem?
>
>
> It built OK when I just had it under C:\engine instead of
> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating
>
>> Alan
>
>
> Alan
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool
3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Alan Williams <al...@googlemail.com>.
On 01-Jun-16 12:27, Alan Williams wrote:
> Hello
>
> I get a failure:
>
> [INFO] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:test
> (default-test) on project dummy-taverna-plugin-activity: Execution
> default-test of goal
> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:t
> est failed: The forked VM terminated without properly saying goodbye. VM
> crash or System.exit called?
> [INFO] [ERROR] Command was cmd.exe /X /C ""C:\Program
> Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_51\jre\bin\java" -jar
> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefirebooter1896791380795738239.jar
> C:\Us
> ers\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire5943729575219558115tmp
> C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire_0317696432267187850tmp"
>
>
> Is that the path length limit problem?
It built OK when I just had it under C:\engine instead of
C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating
> Alan
Alan
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool
3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Alan Williams <al...@googlemail.com>.
Hello
I get a failure:
[INFO] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:test
(default-test) on project dummy-taverna-plugin-activity: Execution
default-test of goal org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-surefire-plugin:2.19.1:t
est failed: The forked VM terminated without properly saying goodbye. VM
crash or System.exit called?
[INFO] [ERROR] Command was cmd.exe /X /C ""C:\Program
Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_51\jre\bin\java" -jar
C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefirebooter1896791380795738239.jar
C:\Us
ers\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire5943729575219558115tmp
C:\Users\alson\taverna\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating-source-release\apache-taverna-engine-3.1.0-incubating\taverna-activity-archetype\target\test-classes\projects\dummyActivity\project\dummy-taverna-plugin\dummy-taverna-plugin-activity\target\surefire\surefire_0317696432267187850tmp"
Is that the path length limit problem?
Alan
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool 3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org>.
On 1 June 2016 at 12:05, Alan Williams <al...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> How to review a release? https://s.apache.org/review-release
> Do they need to be built in a specific order e.g. engine, common activities,
> command line?
Yes, perhaps we should add that to the wiki page. I added it to the VOTE email:
> Build the release candidate *in the above order*, using: mvn clean install
but now I see the order got mixed up in RC2.. :-(
--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
Re: [DISCUSS] Release candidate 2 of Command-line Tool
3.1.0-incubating
Posted by Alan Williams <al...@googlemail.com>.
On 01-Jun-16 12:03, Stian Soiland-Reyes wrote:
> Use this thread to discuss the release candidate proposed in
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/Z320lz77ps9xnov
>
>
> Please reply on the corresponding [VOTE] thread to place votes.
>
> Anyone can participate in testing and voting, not just committers,
> please feel free to try out the release candidate and provide your
> votes!
>
> How to review a release? https://s.apache.org/review-release
Do they need to be built in a specific order e.g. engine, common
activities, command line?
Alan