incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <>
Subject Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating
Date Thu, 16 Jul 2015 18:43:34 GMT
IMO, what would really help would be a step-by-step guide to examining a
release for L & N issues.  Justin explained part of his technique in this
thread already.  The person creating the release artifacts should have a
decent chance at finding these issues before opening any vote thread.


On 7/16/15, 11:28 AM, "Marvin Humphrey" <> wrote:

>On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 9:59 AM, C├ędric Champeau
><> wrote:
>> Like it or not, it passed the vote.
>Given the logistics of rolling another RC (even with a shortened
>window) and the urgency of the release due to security issues, I think
>this was a decent outcome.
>That said, contended release votes are extremely rare at Apache, and
>the release contains some licensing glitches which would ordinarily
>merit a respin in my judgment. I considered voting +1 but in the end
>decided to abstain.
>> (especially because as we said, the License file
>> contains more, but not less, than required),
>This is not quite the case.
>There were some bundled dependencies whose licenses were not noted in
>the top-level LICENSE file. This is a licensing documentation bug,
>rather than a licensing error -- it does not make distribution
>illegal, but it might lead to a downstream consumer failing to uphold
>the conditions of the omitted licenses. For example, they may fail to
>give proper attribution in a binary redistribution.
>Additionally, in the case of normalize.css (hidden inside
>stylesheet.css) and FileNameCompleter.groovy, an Apache header was
>added inappropriately to files containing BSD-licensed and
>MIT-licensed content.  Assuming that the content of those files has
>never been licensed under the ALv2, this is a licensing error, and it
>is a judgment call as to whether a reasonable consumer would interpret
>that header as a mistake.
>> and as
>> Paul said, all jars produces *do* have them.
>Indeed -- I only spot checked, but that's what I saw as well.
>Marvin Humphrey
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message