On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:34 PM John D. Ament <john.d.am...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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? > Sorry - one more thing to clarify. In https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-290 I mentioned explicitly the files I found to be not in compliance. If someone can explain to me how to confirm that these files are not ending up in either singa's build or the binary dependency on glog I can change my vote. > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
