incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <>
Subject Re: [VOTE]: Apache HAWQ Release
Date Thu, 20 Apr 2017 06:02:48 GMT
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 6:30 AM, Ruilong Huo <> wrote:
> Hi All,
> The PPMC vote for the Apache HAWQ release has passed. We
> kindly request that the IPMC now vote on the release.
> The PPMC vote thread is located here:
> The artifacts can be downloaded here:
> The artifacts have been signed with Key: 1B8B6872.
> All JIRAs completed for this release are tagged with 'FixVersion =
>'. You can view them here:
> Please vote accordingly:
> [ ] +1, accept as the official Apache HAWQ release
> [ ] -1, do not accept as the official Apache HAWQ
> release because...
> The vote will run for at least 72 hours.

I do apologize for a delay -- I should've provided this feedback last feedback
last week, but it seems I'll be voting:

-1 (binding)

on the binary portion of this releases. Here's why:
    1. The deal breaker issue is a total lack of clear IP attribution in
     binary artifacts. There's no proper LICENSE, NOTICE and
     DISCLAIMER file in neither the x86 binary package of HAWQ
     nor in the JAVA packages of companion components. This
     need to be fixed as per:
     Note that you HAVE to account to all the dependencies you're
     bundling in a binary release which means your LICENSE and
     NOTICE files will likely get bigger. For Java side of HAWQ
     Apache Geode offers a good place to look for how to deal with
     those files in a binary distribution.

     2. This is one is less of a deal deal breaker for the first release, but
     will be so for subsequent ones: you really shouldn't be shipping
     apache-tomcat package. For one, you already have a dependency
     on bigtop-tomcat in hawq-ranger-plugin which means shipping
     apache-tomcat is wasteful, could conflicting with distribution RPM
     names and frankly looks a bit sloppy coming from the same project.

     3. This is even less of a dealbreaker than #2, but it may help you
     simplify solving for #1: I don't think you need to ship all those
     extra dependencies in hawq-ranger-plugin -- a much better option
     is getting them from a classpath just like other Java packages of
     HAWQ do.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message