Thank you all for the input, let’s consider this a blocker.

As soon as we have the NOTICE fix , I will prepare the new RC.

Gyula

On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 06:51, Yang Wang <danrtsey...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Given that *flink-kubernetes-shaded* already contains a NOTICE file, and
> *flink-kubernetes-webhook* does not bundle any dependencies.
> IIUC, what we should do now is to add a correct NOTICE file only for the
> *flink-kubernetes-operator* module.
>
> If I do not miss anything, this would not be very difficult and I would
> like to fix it.
>
>
> Best,
> Yang
>
> Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> 于2022年3月29日周二 11:25写道:
>
> > I believe if we as the PMC distribute a docker image (which is optional,
> > "convenience"), then that image has to follow the rules for binary
> packages
> > [1]. (And I would assume that applies regardless where we host the
> images.)
> >
> > Now to say that we only publish sources kind of side steps that problem.
> At
> > the same time it probably also defeats the purpose of the preview
> release,
> > which is to make it easier for folks that are not active contributors to
> > take the operator for a test drive.
> >
> > So I'm leaning towards publishing the images with respective NOTICE
> > requirements (for the layers that we add).
> >
> > We are also planning to publish the jar files in the future as it helps
> to
> > build clients and those would need to have the binary NOTICE also.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Thomas
> >
> > [1] https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html#binary
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 9:20 AM Gyula Fóra <gyf...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I see your point and the value for having such a notice added.
> > >
> > > I think there are 2 completely distinct questions at play here:
> > >
> > > a) Is there a legal requirement for a NOTICE file for the docker image?
> > > b) If not, should we block the release on this and add it immediately?
> > >
> > > For a)
> > > I think from a legal (and ASF policy) perspective there is one question
> > > that decides whether this is a requirement for this release or not:
> > > Is the docker image part of the release?
> > >
> > > I think the answer here is clearly no, the image is not part of the
> > > release. Only the Dockerfile is part of the release.
> > >
> > > For b)
> > > I think adding the NOTICE is a good idea but it will take some work so
> I
> > > would not block the preview release on it.
> > > If someone has some handy utility or experience generating it, I don't
> > mind
> > > including it in later RCs of course.
> > > Otherwise we can aim for the next release.
> > >
> > > Gyula
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 6:03 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > One difference to Flink is that the distribution bundled in the
> docker
> > > > image still contains the NOTICE covering the contents of it.
> > > >
> > > > It may admittedly not be the most discoverable place, but a
> reasonable
> > > one
> > > > I think.
> > > >
> > > > Docker as a whole is very weird when it comes to licensing.
> > > > Think of all the things are are shipped in an image; I don't think we
> > can
> > > > (nor should) try to document everything in there.
> > > > For the most part this is also not necessary as the Flink images are
> > > based
> > > > on Debian,
> > > > where (al)most every installed package already embeds licensing
> > > > information into the image.
> > > >
> > > > However, for content that we copy into the image (i.e., the jars), I
> > > think
> > > > it would be reasonable to document that.
> > > > (and based on experience from the Flink side has also shown other
> > > > advantages beyond licensing...)
> > > >
> > > > On 28/03/2022 17:41, Gyula Fóra wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the input!
> > > >
> > > > I am not an expert on this topic and have been contemplating this
> > myself
> > > > also.
> > > > We are basically trying to follow the precedent set by Flink and
> > Statefun
> > > > projects where the docker builds that we use to publish images to
> > > > dockerhub do not declare any notices.
> > > >
> > > > We will not use ghcr.io for the final release but will use dockerhub
> > > like
> > > > flink and other apache projects.
> > > >
> > > > If I look at it from a strictly technical point of view, the docker
> > image
> > > > is not part of the official release (as it's also not part of the
> > > > flink/statefun release).
> > > >
> > > > It would be good to get some input from others on this. It's not
> > > > impossible to add the notices but it's considerable work and
> > maintenance
> > > > overhead.
> > > > By extending the logic would you then also add license information
> for
> > > the
> > > > base images of the docker container (and so on so forth)?
> > > >
> > > > My gut feeling would be that we could highlight this in the NOTICE of
> > the
> > > > main project  (or some other appropriate place) but we do not
> > explicitly
> > > > list the dependencies.
> > > >
> > > > Would be good to hear how others feel about this!
> > > >
> > > > Gyula
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 5:26 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I don't think having users build the fat-jar & docker image absolves
> > us
> > > >> of all responsibility w.r.t. the licensing of used products.
> > > >>
> > > >> At the very least we need to inform users what licenses the fat-jar
> &
> > > >> docker image fall under such that they can make an informed decision
> > as
> > > to
> > > >> whether they can adhere to said restrictions.
> > > >> In particular since building it yourself is (apparently) a hard
> > > >> requirement for using said product.
> > > >>
> > > >> Even beyond that though, as *we* push images to ghcr.io we still
> need
> > > to
> > > >> adhere to the licensing requirements in any case afaict.
> > > >>
> > > >> On 28/03/2022 17:07, Gyula Fóra wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi Chesnay,
> > > >>
> > > >> Let me try to explain the "strange stuff"
> > > >>
> > > >> flink-kubernetes-shaded relocates some classes found in
> > flink-kubernetes
> > > >> in order to not conflict with some of the operator dependencies.
> > > >> This is necessary as flink-kubernetes packages almost everything in
> > the
> > > >> fat-jar as-is without relocation. I think this should be fine from a
> > > >> release perspective, as flink-kubernetes already contains the
> > > >> relevant notice files.
> > > >>
> > > >> For  flink-kubernetes-operator we are not releasing a fat-jar as we
> > > don't
> > > >> have any client binaries etc. It is not necessary for the users
> > > therefore
> > > >> it's not part of the release.
> > > >> We release the Dockerfile instead so that users can build the image.
> > > >> Since the fatjar is not part of the release we do not have bundled
> > > >> dependencies, and we do not need extra licensing information I
> > believe.
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Gyula
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 4:40 PM Chesnay Schepler <
> ches...@apache.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> There's some strange stuff in here.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> What exactly is the purpose of flink-kubernetes-shaded? You're just
> > > >>> re-packaging flink-kubernetes without making any changes.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The uploaded flink-kubernetes-operator jar isn't bundling any
> > > >>> dependencies. Why is the fat jar not uploaded? Is it used anywhere
> > else
> > > >>> (e.g., directly embedded into a docker image)
> > > >>> If it is used, where do you have the appropriate licensing
> > information
> > > >>> for the bundled dependencies?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 28/03/2022 16:14, Gyula Fóra wrote:
> > > >>> > Hi everyone,
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the
> version
> > > >>> 0.1.0 of
> > > >>> > Apache Flink Kubernetes Operator,
> > > >>> > as follows:
> > > >>> > [ ] +1, Approve the release
> > > >>> > [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific
> > comments)
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > **Release Overview**
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > As an overview, the release consists of the following:
> > > >>> > a) Kubernetes Operator canonical source distribution (including
> the
> > > >>> > Dockerfile), to be deployed to the release repository at
> > > >>> dist.apache.org
> > > >>> > b) Kubernetes Operator Helm Chart to be deployed to the release
> > > >>> repository
> > > >>> > at dist.apache.org
> > > >>> > c) Maven artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > **Staging Areas to Review**
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > The staging areas containing the above mentioned artifacts are as
> > > >>> follows,
> > > >>> > for your review:
> > > >>> > * All artifacts for a,b) can be found in the corresponding dev
> > > >>> repository
> > > >>> > at dist.apache.org [1]
> > > >>> > * All artifacts for c) can be found at the Apache Nexus
> Repository
> > > [2]
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > All artifacts are signed with the
> > > >>> > key 911F218F79ACEA8EB453799EEE325DDEBFED467D [3]
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Other links for your review:
> > > >>> > * JIRA release notes [4]
> > > >>> > * source code tag "release-0.1.0-rc1" [5]
> > > >>> > * PR to update the website Downloads page to include Kubernetes
> > > >>> Operator
> > > >>> > links [6]
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > **Vote Duration**
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > The voting time will run for at least 72 hours.
> > > >>> > It is adopted by majority approval, with at least 3 PMC
> affirmative
> > > >>> votes.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > **Note for Functional Verification**
> > > >>> > Please use the source distribution and helm chart directly from
> [1]
> > > to
> > > >>> > build and deploy the operator in your testing environment.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Thanks,
> > > >>> > Gyula
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > [1]
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flink/flink-kubernetes-operator-0.1.0-rc1/
> > > >>> > [2]
> > > >>>
> > >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheflink-1490/
> > > >>> > [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/flink/KEYS
> > > >>> > [4]
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12315522&version=12351499
> > > >>> > [5]
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/tree/release-0.1.0-rc1
> > > >>> > [6] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pull/519
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to