cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan ellis <>
Subject Re: Cassandra 0.3 RC is out
Date Thu, 14 May 2009 10:38:26 GMT
Huh?  "our release process is geared towards large orgs with room for  
a FT release mgr.  If it is too onerous, do it more often."

Does that seem bassackwards to anyone else?


On May 14, 2009, at 5:24 AM, ant elder <> wrote:

> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
> <> wrote:
>> (dropping the users list from CC)
>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:29 AM, Jonathan Ellis <>  
>> wrote:
>>> Oops, fat-fingered the url:
>> Hi,
>> Although I understand this is not meant to be an official release,  
>> and
>> totally agree that getting early feedback is good, the way this is
>> presented is confusing.
>> The term "release candidate" and putting it under cassandra/releases
>> makes it appear as publishing this tarball is a project decision, but
>> I see no discussions on this dev list about putting this release
>> candidate out.
>> I'd be much more comfortable if you would move it under
>>, for example, to make it clear  
>> that
>> you, as opposed to the Cassandra project, are providing a tarball for
>> people to test. Or use the "bleeding edge" link at
>>, which points to
>> development snapshots.
>> As is now, the potential for confusion with an Apache release (or
>> release candidate) is too high IMO.
>> What do mentors think?
>> -- Bertrand (with my Incubator PMC member hat on)
> I agree. I know it may seem a PITA but i think the this is an
> important area for poddlings to learn about. The ASF realese guide has
> this to say:
> "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. The only people who are
> supposed to know about such packages are the people following the dev
> list (or searching its archives) and thus aware of the conditions
> placed on the package. If you find that the general public are
> downloading such test packages, then remove them.
> Under no circumstances are unapproved builds a substitute for
> releases. If this policy seems inconvenient, then release more often.
> Proper release management is a key aspect of Apache software
> development."
>   ...ant

View raw message