Damodar, Did you see my review comments?
Cheers, Hugo On 21 feb. 2014, at 16:00, Damoder Reddy <damoder.re...@citrix.com> wrote: > Initially I thought my change caused to bundle the mysql-connector-java into > RPM in 4.3... but after did more analysis I found that mysql-connector is > already getting bundled into RPM in 4.2.x as well. > > Looks like issue is something else as well.. I am not sure this will fix the > actual issue. > > Anyhow we need to apply this patch even after fixing the actual issue. > > Thanks & Regards > Damodar/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Damoder Reddy [mailto:damoder.re...@citrix.com] > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 6:24 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: Animesh Chaturvedi > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Policy blocker? > > I have created a defect for this at: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6152 > > I have put the patch in review board at : https://reviews.apache.org/r/18353/ > > Please review the same and commit it to the branch(4.3-forward) if these > changes are fine. Otherwise please let me know if we need to put it into any > other scope other than provided > > @Animesh : Please Cherry Pick it from 4.3.-forward once committed. > > Thanks & Regards > Damodar/ > > -----Original Message----- > From: Damoder Reddy [mailto:damoder.re...@citrix.com] > Sent: Friday, 21 February 2014 5:19 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Policy blocker? > > > For DB HA we have included a new class StaticStrategy.java which is having > compile time dependency on mysql -connector-java. > I will make change in pom, as provided scope dependency instead of compile > time so that maven will not include in the bundle while packaging. > > Thanks & Regards > Damodar/ > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us] > Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 12:24 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Policy blocker? > > I will try to work on this a bit this evening, but others may be faster. > > --David > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi > <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: >> Chip, David thanks for the detailed explanation, is one of you taking >> care of fixing this issue or we need to find other volunteers >> >> Thanks >> Animesh >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chipchild...@apache.org] >>> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 10:13 AM >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Policy blocker? >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Chip Childers >>> <chipchild...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:37:46AM -0500, David Nalley wrote: >>>>> Hi folks, >>>>> >>>>> I cringe to raise this issue. After 6 RCs I am sure we are all >>>>> feeling a little bit of release vote fatigue. Especially Animesh. >>>>> I apologize in advance; in all other respects I am ready to give a +1 to >>>>> RC6. >>>>> >>>>> I've been playing with 4.3.0-rc6 for a couple of days now. I >>>>> attempted to build some RPMs and had problems with dependency >>>>> resolution in maven. This led me to looking at a number of >>>>> different poms, and I noticed mysql-connector-java is listed as a >>>>> runtime dependency. For our end users, this really isn't necessary >>>>> - the debs and rpms specify a requirement (effectively a system >>>>> requirement in the terms of >>>>> policy) for mysql-connector-java. We don't need it to build the >>>>> software (at least not in any location I've seen) - just when running. >>>>> (And thus its a system dependency, much like MySQL is.) >>>>> >>>>> mysql-connector-java is GPLv2; which is Cat X. By including it as >>>>> a dependency in the pom it automatically gets downloaded. The 3rd >>>>> Party software policy has this line in it: >>>>> >>>>> "YOU MUST NOT distribute build scripts or documentation within an >>>>> Apache product with the purpose of causing the default/standard >>>>> build of an Apache product to include any part of aprohibited work." >>>>> >>>>> We've released software with this dependency previously. Is this a >>>>> blocker for 4.3 or do we fix going forward? (If we hadn't already >>>>> shipped releases with this problem I'd lean a bit more towards it >>>>> being a blocker - but its more murky now.) >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts, comments, flames? >>>>> >>>>> --David >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html >>>> >>>> During incubation, this dependency was raised as an issue. >>>> Generally, there are 2 ways to deal with Category X dependencies >>>> within an ASF >>>> project: >>>> >>>> 1) Make it an optional part of the software. This is what we do >>>> with the nonoss build target, but won't work for the mysql-connector. >>>> >>>> 2) Make it a "system dependency" that is expected to be installed >>>> on the system prior to our software. >>>> >>>> mysql-connector-java (and the python equiv) were supposed to be >>>> handled using option 2 (system dependency). >>>> >>>> Currently, our RPM packaging depends on the relevant RPM to pull >>>> this in as a system dependency. I can't tell with the DEBs, but >>>> that would need to be reviewed. >>>> >>>> The problem is that our maven poms pull down the jar automatically >>>> right now. This is the blocker for us. I'm certainly not a >>>> lawyer, but my understanding of ASF policy is that we need to make >>>> some changes before making another release. >>>> >>>> So, there appear to be three things that have to happen: >>>> >>>> 1) Confirm that the mysql-connector-java is a system dependency in >>>> the DEB packaging. >>>> >>>> 2) Ensure that a "normal build" of the project using mvn does not >>>> automatically download the mysql-connector-java jar files. >>>> >>>> 3) Retest the project to ensure that the above changes work. >>>> >>>> Then we can re-spin an RC. >>>> >>>> -chip >>> >>> For those following along at home, here are some relevant links: >>> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html >>> >>> http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html
