madlib-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rahul Iyer <ri...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] MADlib v1.10-rc1
Date Tue, 21 Feb 2017 18:04:47 GMT
Hi Roman,

Thanks for your message.

As you noted, there were some changes in these files including addition of
a deprecation notice and refactoring out an unrelated function. The one
hunk of change that looks like a lot of lines changed is an indentation of
the main function body, due to a context manager statement added to the top
of the block.

In summary:
- in py_in file about 4 lines were added (excluding comments) and 30 lines
were removed
- in sql_in file 4 lines were updated (all just change of name) and 2 lines
of deprecation notice were added.

IMO, none of these lines are significant IP work since it's just minor
edits and comments. This is subject to interpretation, for which we defer
to your expertise. We would rather do a new RC now than face problems in
IPMC vote.

Finally, I prefer to add Apache headers to every file and eliminate this
issue (as discussed in the legal thread), but we can make that happen in a
future release.

Thanks,
Rahul

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 9:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org>
wrote:

>
>
> I'm afraid, I'll have to be -1
>
> It seems that the following files were not a straight rename:
>
> src/ports/postgres/modules/utilities/data_preparation.py_in  ->
> src/ports/postgres/modules/utilities/create_indicators.py_in
> src/ports/postgres/modules/utilities/data_preparation.sql_in  ->
> src/ports/postgres/modules/utilities/create_indicators.sql_in
>
> but in fact were modified quite a bit. As such we should really treat those
> as new work that is now licensed under the ALv2 and requires ALv2
> license header.
>
> I know this dual situation with BSD/ALv2 is not ideal and I'm trying to
> resolve it for us once and for all so we don't have to worry about things
> like this one:
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-293
>
> Since we'll have to do a re-spin, I'd like to also suggest that we take
> care of the nits in Ed's feedback.
>
> Hope this is OK with Satoshi.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>

Mime
View raw message