ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Downloads on the web site
Date Wed, 11 Mar 2015 08:06:52 GMT
Brane, let me review the docs and get back to you.

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko ─îibej <brane@apache.org> wrote:

> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > Brane,
> >
> > The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
> for a
> > vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
> > that we are not aware of.
> It's all documented here:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
>     Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
>     non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
>     release candidates, or any other similar package.
> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> > Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick
> the
> > tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release
> is
> > out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base
> of
> > the Ignite project.
> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> confusing links to the web site.//
> > As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a couple
> > of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> become
> > an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch
> one
> > zip archive with another when that happens.
> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
> don't want to do that myself.
> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> -- Brane

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