spark-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marcin Tustin <>
Subject Re: Spark 2.0.0-preview artifacts still not available in Maven
Date Sun, 05 Jun 2016 19:29:23 GMT
+1 agree that right the problem is theoretical esp if the preview label is
in the version coordinates as it should be.

On Saturday, June 4, 2016, Sean Owen <> wrote:

> Artifacts that are not for public consumption shouldn't be in a public
> release; this is instead what nightlies are for. However, this was a
> normal public release.
> I am not even sure why it's viewed as particularly unsafe, but, unsafe
> alpha and beta releases are just releases, and their name and
> documentation clarify their status for those who care. These are
> regularly released by other projects.
> That is, the question is not, is this a beta? Everyone agrees it
> probably is, and is documented as such.
> The question is, can you just not fully release it? I don't think so,
> even as a matter of process, and don't see a good reason not to.
> To Reynold's quote, I think that's suggesting that not all projects
> will release to a repo at all (e.g. OpenOffice?). I don't think it
> means you're free to not release some things to Maven, if that's
> appropriate and common for the type of project.
> Regarding risk, remember that the audience for Maven artifacts are
> developers, not admins or end users. I understand that developers can
> temporarily change their build to use a different resolver if they
> care, but, why? (and, where would someone figure this out?)
> Regardless: the 2.0.0-preview docs aren't published to go along with
> the source/binary releases. Those need be released to the project
> site, though probably under a different /preview/ path or something.
> If they are, is it weird that someone wouldn't find the release in the
> usual place in Maven then?
> Given that the driver of this was concern over wide access to
> 2.0.0-preview, I think it's best to err on the side openness vs some
> theoretical problem.
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Matei Zaharia <
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > Personally I'd just put them on the staging repo and link to that on the
> > downloads page. It will create less confusion for people browsing Maven
> > Central later and wondering which releases are safe to use.
> >
> > Matei
> >
> > On Jun 3, 2016, at 8:22 AM, Mark Hamstra <
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > It's not a question of whether the preview artifacts can be made
> available
> > on Maven central, but rather whether they must be or should be.  I've
> got no
> > problems leaving these unstable, transitory artifacts out of the more
> > permanent, canonical repository.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <javascript:;>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <javascript:;>

Want to work at Handy? Check out our culture deck and open roles 
Latest news <> at Handy
Handy just raised $50m 
by Fidelity

View raw message