incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jai Asher <jai.ashe...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Pulsar Release 1.22.1-incubating Candidate 2
Date Tue, 12 Jun 2018 17:22:31 GMT
The vote for releasing Apache Pulsar 1.22.1-incubating is now closed.

With a total of +3 binding votes and no -1 votes, the vote passes.

+1s (binding):
Dave
Justin
Jim

This is the link to the dev@ vote thread for the same, will update the
release process to add this link in the initial mail next release onwards -
Thanks Dave for pointing this out.
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/27dbe3f467d2df18bf2799b480d66194bf8943f7fd764ecb9d15773c@%3Cdev.pulsar.apache.org%3E

Thanks, Yang, Justin and Craig for your inputs on the ASF and BSD header -
we will correct these files by removing ASF header, leaving only BSD header.


On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Matteo Merli <mmerli@apache.org> wrote:

> Thanks Yang, Justin and Craig for the discussion.
>
> We will correct these files by removing ASF header, leaving only BSD header
> + comment.
>
> Matteo
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 9:59 AM Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'll add my own chimes to this discussion.
> >
> > > On Jun 10, 2018, at 2:57 AM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
> > wrote:
> > > ...
> > > I think I agree with Matteo that those protobuf files should not have
> an
> > ASF header. Generally changes to a file are under the original license,
> see
> > [1], but it not a big issue as BSD is an Category A license and you are
> > including the full license text. It’s also seems odd because the license
> > calls them out as BSD licensed.
> >
> > Yes, these files are not being relicensed. Files that are covered by an
> > ICLA by the original author, or covered by a software grant can be
> > relicensed. In that case, removing the BSD license header and replacing
> it
> > by the Apache license header is appropriate.
> >
> > In this case of a BSD-licensed file that has minor changes, the Apache
> > license header is inappropriate. The only part of the file that is
> > Apache-licensed is the changes made here. So the Apache license header
> that
> > states that this file is "Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation ...
> > under one or more contributor license agreements" is not correct.
> >
> > The comment line "This file is derived from Google ProcolBuffer
> > CodedInputStream class" is sufficient documentation, without the Apache
> > license header.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Justin
> > >
> > > 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#3party
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> > Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
> > clr@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> > --
> Matteo Merli
> <mmerli@apache.org>
>

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