Wei,
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:19 PM Wang Wei <wang...@apache.org> wrote: > John, > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:24 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Wang, > > > > First, please review [1], especially the Note section. > > > Thank you for the information. > > > Second, even if I were to change my vote from -1 to +1 do you have enough > > votes? Only Justin has voted +1. Or were you carrying over Alan Gates' > > vote? > > > I think if the glog issue is resolved (considering it as an optional > dependency), the -1 vote should be changed to 0 (or +1). -1 may stop others > from checking and voting the release. > Yes. I will carry over Alan Gates' vote. > > Until I see legal weigh in, I'm not comfortable changing my vote from a -1. Based on how you're building, I'm not sure how glog can be considered an optional dependency. If I remove it from my system, will singa still run? > Thanks. > > Best, > Wei > > > > > > > [1]: http://incubator.apache.org/whoweare.html > > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 8:40 PM Wang Wei <wang...@comp.nus.edu.sg> wrote: > > > > > Hi John, > > > > > > Could you revise your vote as the glog issue is resolved? > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Best, > > > Wei > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:25 AM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Fair enough. > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 6:48 PM Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > > https://github.com/google/glog/blob/master/COPYING > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 7:44 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Niclas, > > > > > > > > > > So I'll point out a couple of things. > > > > > > > > > > 1. -1's on releases aren't vetos, so if someone else (e.g. you) > > voted a > > > > +1 > > > > > my -1 would be moot. > > > > > > > > > > 2. I mentioned in my response that the main issue is that I can't > > find > > > a > > > > > listed license for glog and I was choosing GPL because I found a > > source > > > > > file with a GPL header. If the first file I looked at was another > > > > license, > > > > > I would have assumed that license. It has nothing to do with build > > > > chain. > > > > > If you have a link that can show that glog is BSD licensed, that > > would > > > > > settle this. Note that this issue [1] exists. > > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/google/glog/issues/118 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 12:04 AM Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, but in this case it is; > > > > > > 1. Singa depends on Glog > > > > > > 2. Glog is BSD licensed > > > > > > 3. Glog use a build tool chain that is GPL'd and includes a > build > > > > > script > > > > > > to compensate for missing toolchain tools. > > > > > > 4. Singa doesn't use Glog's build toolchain > > > > > > > > > > > > Your (John) argument is that Glog is incorrectly licensed and > > should > > > > have > > > > > > been GPL'd. I think that reasoning is incorrect, and that Glog is > > > > > licensed > > > > > > correctly and hence it is not relevant whether it is optional or > > not > > > > for > > > > > > Singa. > > > > > > > > > > > > Given that we have both belt and suspenders for this, I think the > > -1 > > > > can > > > > > be > > > > > > withdrawn regarding the Glog dependency. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > Niclas > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:49 AM, John D. Ament < > > > johndam...@apache.org> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > We actually just had a discussion recently on legal-discuss on > > this > > > > > type > > > > > > of > > > > > > > topic. Specifically, Cat-X and optional vs required > > dependencies. > > > > > Henri > > > > > > > and I settled on the wording you'll find at [1] as the final > > > result. > > > > > > > Basically, you can rely on Cat-X but only for optional > features. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can probably follow up with legal on whether this does fall > > into > > > > the > > > > > > GPL > > > > > > > bucket though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1]: https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#optional > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 9:45 PM Niclas Hedhman < > > nic...@hedhman.org> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that ends up being a build time dependency in GLOG, > > i.e. > > > > the > > > > > > > > equivalent of Systems Requirement, and not in itself viral to > > the > > > > ASF > > > > > > > > software. I assume that Google is much more worried about > this > > > and > > > > > may > > > > > > > even > > > > > > > > have checked with their Legal team... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Want to check with legal-discuss@ ? Is my memory failing me, > > or > > > > > hasn't > > > > > > > FSF > > > > > > > > stated that the build output is not bound by GPL of the build > > > > > > toolchain? > > > > > > > > (otherwise they can't release their own LGPL stuff) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > Niclas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:27 AM, John D. Ament < > > > > > johndam...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -1 at least I think there's an issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > While the source code all looks good, the resulting binary > is > > > not > > > > > > > valid. > > > > > > > > > There's no how to build doc, so I looked at your > .travis.yml. > > > It > > > > > > > > confirmed > > > > > > > > > what I suspected for make, but then I started looking at > your > > > > > > required > > > > > > > > > packages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You require glog [1], which I can't find a license for. > > > However, > > > > > > glog > > > > > > > > > includes [2] which is GPL, which makes glog GPL and as a > > > result, > > > > > your > > > > > > > > code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/google/glog > > > > > > > > > [2]: https://github.com/google/glog/blob/master/missing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 8:24 PM Wang Wei < > wang...@apache.org > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The SINGA community has voted on and approved a proposal > to > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > Apache > > > > > > > > > > SINGA 1.1.0 (incubating). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The vote thread is at: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/singa-dev/201701.mbox/% > > > > > > > > > > 3CCAJz0iLvAaEd5AgCqaWFD1M4-D_3 > > EBh%3DUHbeZu-MRn%3DcKuQiX-Q%4 > > > > > > > > > 0mail.gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > %3E > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the result is at: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/singa-dev/201701.mbox/% > > > > > > > > > 3cCAJz0iLspBOrsCSTaWuraOWwETiDB4cn14ak5SgdYB8umXOJ3Kw@mail. > > > > > gmail.com > > > > > > > %3e > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We ask the IPMC to vote on this release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The artifacts to be voted on are located here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/singa/1.1.0/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The hashes of the artifacts are as follows: > > > > > > > > > > MD5: 08 CA 31 10 4E 79 02 16 A1 D7 3F 20 2D 60 21 BB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Release artifacts are signed with the following key: > > > > > > > > > > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/dinhtta.asc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the signature file is: > > > > > > > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/ > > dist/dev/incubator/singa/1.1.0 > > > > > > > > > > /apache-singa-incubating-1.1.0-RC1.tar.gz.asc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Github tag is at: > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-singa/releases/tag/ > > > > > v1.1.0-rc1 > > > > > > > > > > commit ID is: 59ca44a7ce38ce4f965511c805cda074d0b8e360 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To check the license, you can use the Apache Rat tool as > > > > follows: > > > > > > > > > > 1. download & decompress apache rat from > > > > > > > > http://creadur.apache.org/rat/ > > > > > > > > > > download_rat.cgi > > > > > > > > > > 2. run the following command under singa folder: > > > > > > > > > > java -jar /PATH/TO/RAT/apache-rat-0.11.jar -E > > > rat-excludes > > > > > -d . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rat_check > > > > > > > > > > 3. check the results in file named "rat_check" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please check and vote on releasing this package. The vote > > is > > > > open > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > > > least 72 hours and passes if a majority of at least three > > +1 > > > > > votes > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > cast. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Release this package as Apache SINGA > > 1.0.0-incubating > > > > > > > > > > [ ] 0 I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with > > the > > > > > > release > > > > > > > > > > [ ] -1 Do not release this package because... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > > > Wei > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > > > > > > > > http://polygene.apache.org <http://zest.apache.org> - New > > Energy > > > > for > > > > > > > Java > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > > > > > > http://polygene.apache.org <http://zest.apache.org> - New Energy > > for > > > > > Java > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > > > > http://polygene.apache.org <http://zest.apache.org> - New Energy for > > > Java > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
