ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Boudnik <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Apache Ignite 1.2.0 release (RC2)
Date Wed, 01 Jul 2015 18:56:24 GMT
On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 11:42AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:44AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > > GridGain community edition is not governed by Apache should have LGPL
> > > turned on.
> > >
> > > The LGPL profile in Maven should be turned on by default because our
> > users
> > > should build with LGPL libraries included. However, the Apache Ignite
> > > binary release should have LGPL turned off, as users can download it
> >
> > There's no such thing as Apache binary release: ASF releases only source
> > code.
> 
> Cos, of course we know this. How should we call the Apache Ignite binary
> release on the Apache Ignite website?

As has been discussed a numerous times, these are "convenience binaries" not a
binary release. The latter will be frown upon by IPMC (again).

Cos

> > Cos
> >
> > > directly from the Apache Ignite website directly.
> > >
> > > D.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Anton Vinogradov <
> > avinogradov@gridgain.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Also,
> > > > Currently lgpl profile is turned on during Ignite Fabric Release build
> > and
> > > > as a result distribution contain lgpl artifacts.
> > > > Should we build Igrite releases without lgpl profile in future?
> > > >
> > > > Is it legal to build GridGain Community Edition with lgpl profile
> > turned
> > > > on?
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Anton Vinogradov <
> > avinogradov@gridgain.com
> > > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > > As Justin said we have dependency on javax.servlet-api-3.0.1 (CDDL
+
> > > > > GPLv2). As far as I understang we can not ptovide this artifact as
a
> > part
> > > > > of Ignite binary distribution.
> > > > > But I found that Apache Tomcat have same (javax.servlet.*) classes
> > under
> > > > > Apache licence (for example -
> > > > >
> > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/tomcat/blob/trunk/java/javax/servlet/AsyncContext.java
> > > > > ).
> > > > > Is there any chances to use these classes at Ignite?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 8:24 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <cos@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> We have a nighly build going on builds.apache.org. It should
be
> > easy to
> > > > >> add
> > > > >> one to do the release's convenience binaries there as well.
> > Thoughts?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Cos
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 07:18PM, Branko ─îibej wrote:
> > > > >> > On 26.06.2015 14:52, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > > >> > > Brane, mvn clean package does this. The process is
covered in
> > > > >> DEVNOTES.txt
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Is that what you ask about?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > No, I'm asking where (on which machine) this is done. Ideally,
> > these
> > > > >> > convenience binaries should be build on controlled ASF
> > infrastructure,
> > > > >> > not on some random (possibly infected) developer's laptop.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > -- Brane
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > 2015-06-26 9:33 GMT+03:00 Branko ─îibej <brane@apache.org>:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> On 22.06.2015 12:20, Yakov Zhdanov wrote:
> > > > >> > >>> Guys,
> > > > >> > >>>
> > > > >> > >>> ignite-1.2.0-incubating-rc2 has been accepted
with 7 votes (2
> > > > >> binding).
> > > > >> > >>> Thanks to those who voted:
> > > > >> > >>>
> > > > >> > >>>    - Gianfranco
> > > > >> > >>>    - Sergi
> > > > >> > >>>    - Branko (binding)
> > > > >> > >>>    - Alexey Goncharuk
> > > > >> > >>>    - Valentin
> > > > >> > >>>    - Semyon
> > > > >> > >>>    - Konstantin Boudnik (binding)
> > > > >> > >>>
> > > > >> > >>> I will start vote on general list shortly.
> > > > >> > >> By the way, and before we get hammered about this
on general@:
> > > > >> Where are
> > > > >> > >> the 'convenience binaries' for Ignite releases
being built?
> > Even if
> > > > >> > >> they're not official, they should be built on controlled
> > hardware
> > > > and
> > > > >> > >> the release process doc should contain instructions
for
> > building
> > > > >> them.
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> > >> -- Brane
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >

Mime
View raw message