Given this is Quickstep's first release, yes, I think I could be
persuaded to make this a +1 given LEGAL-291 :)
I don't want to cause more confusion if you've already started
re-rolling things, Marc.
John D. Ament wrote:
So, knowing that some of the files are explained under LEGAL-291, would you
consider changing your vote? While there are some changes to the LICENSE
file, its not a killer (since a user would see the correct licenses in the
source files).
I'd vote a +1 if there's a JIRA covering the fixes. I would vote -1 if
that JIRA isn't fixed for the next release.
Here's a link to how to assemble the LICENSE contents, in case you need it:
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps
John
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 6:49 PM Josh Elser<els...@apache.org> wrote:
Marc Spehlmann wrote:
Thank you for reviewing Apache Quickstep 0.1.0 rc6 (incubating),
everyone.
With this I will close the vote.
+1
Julian (binding)
Jignesh
-1
Josh (binding)
As we received one -1 binding vote, we will not release rc6.
___
The biggest issue seems to be our licensing checks.
Now Fixed:
- third_party/src/cpplint/lint_everything.py
- ./parser/preprocessed/genfiles.sh
- ./query_execution/ForemanDistributed.cpp (not sure about the origin
of
this and the following three)
- ./query_execution/ForemanDistributed.hpp
- ./query_execution/PolicyEnforcerDistributed.cpp
- ./query_execution/PolicyEnforcerDistributed.hpp
- We checked the KEYS in the svn repo against the signed artifact and
the
sig is fine, it was just my info which was old on the people.apache site
->
now updated.
- Our website has been updated to include the logo and reword "apache
quickstep (incubating)".
In progress:
- We're reviewing what exactly goes in LICENSE/NOTICE files and will fix
them for the next release.
Feel free to ping if you'd like me to look over what you have put
together before you spent time on the next RC. I can also provide some
other examples of a LICENSE file which would look "similar".
Not Fixed:
- Julian turned us on to a previous issue with pre-processed parser
files. It appears the content in /parser/preprocessed/ should be fine via
discussion on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-291
Thanks for this pointer! I thought something like this might have been
the case (but was too lazy to parse it ;))
Thank you,
Marc
- Josh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
