cd python
> python setup.py sdist
> pip install dist/*.tar.gz
>
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 1:32 PM Xiangyu Li wrote:
>
>> make-distribution.sh with --pip would run a `python setup.py sdist`
>> within that make-distribution.sh script.
>> I also
rk
> itself right. Omit --pip?
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 3:32 PM Xiangyu Li wrote:
>
>> make-distribution.sh with --pip would run a `python setup.py sdist`
>> within that make-distribution.sh script.
>> I also tested `make-distribution.sh` without --pip, and the same
se, so you can make the binary release with it, but, I'd
> probably say it's easier/better to simply skip adding the license in this
> path (if it's supposed to work this way at all) as the use case, a custom
> derived work, doesn't need the *ASF's* license stateme
the python directory.
>
> Step 2 would fail because of missing the licenses directory.
> "
>
> That shouldn't depend on the license file, and the script you showed does
> not fail when not present, so I am wondering what this means.
> I'm not sure there's a
31 PM Sean Owen wrote:
> Hm, the build fails? you can see this is just skipped if not present, for
> this reason.
> I'm not clear why you need the file for its own sake, for your own
> internal modification that you don't redistribute.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 1,
t; LICENSE-binary file from the right hash commit from git, if desired, as
> part of your build.
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 10:19 AM Xiangyu Li wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I downloaded spark-2.4.5 source from
>> https://mirrors.ocf.berkeley.edu/apache/s
m not ready to do a pull request, so hopefully we can discuss
it here first.
--
Sincerely
Xiangyu Li
