drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Drill version 0.5.0-incubating
Date Wed, 03 Sep 2014 05:26:38 GMT
>
>
> > For points 3 & 4, I think you have a very conservative interpretation of
> Apache requirements which goes beyond the guidelines as well as what other
> projects do.
>
> I think you find the incubator (as a whole) has a more conservative view
> than me.  While the vote in only officially on the source release,
> incubator people may look at the binary for NOTICE, LICENCE and Category
> B/Category X license issues. (See thread on UserGrid currently on general@).
> It up to you what you do but if you include Category B jars and don't
> prompt there's a risk the vote may not pass. If you want I can point out
> several projects that do it this way.
>

Yeah, I've seen that.  It is hard for podlings given the varying
requirements.  You never know for a certain release who is going to think
something is important that wasn't previously.  But enough whining...

I want to reassure you that a number of people have read the documents
you've told us to follow.  While they provide some guidelines, they aren't
as clear as I'd like and they are clearly inconsistent with what many
projects are doing.

I guess we'll put class-b jars into a separate directory.  Given how
important binary distributions are to the community at large, and the
standard that others projects are achieving, hopefully we'll be able to
convince the general incubator list that we're achieving the spirit of the
Apache guidelines.  (Maybe we can remind people that even HTTPD and Tomcat
projects produce binaries :D )

thanks again for your help,
Jacques


>
> Thanks,
> Justin

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message