community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Error on Release Download Page page ?
Date Thu, 08 Dec 2016 01:52:17 GMT
On 8 December 2016 at 01:38, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
> For me, the key is the "official release" - an official release has been
> voted on by the relevant PMC and approved for use.  The labeling of it -
> alpha, beta, etc is moot.  Maybe we should take out that part and instead
> use:
>
> Only release artifacts that have been approved by the relevant PMC may be
> linked from the download page. All other download links should be removed
> in a timely fashion.

"All other download links should be removed" - there is no grace period.

The reference to timely removal of links applies to alpha/beta/etc
releases which are expected to be short-lived.
They should not remain on the page once the full GA release has been published.

However I think it would be better to mostly keep the original
wording, but tweaked to remove the ambiguity.

> ?
>
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:32 PM Niclas Hedhman <niclas@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
>> I agree with Stian. It was discussed ~12-14 years ago, how to deal with
>> "release for public consumption", "release for beta testers", "nightly
>> builds" and so on. And AFAIR, the Stian's explanation mirrors the consensus
>> from back then, and perhaps the wording is not optimal.
>>
>> Niclas
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <stain@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hang on, it's perfectly fine for ASF projects to publish and link to
>> > milestone/alpha/beta releases - as long as they have also gone through
>> > a formal release VOTE and checking, they are still "official
>> > releases".
>> >
>> > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#release-types
>> >
>> > What is confusing about your quoted pagraph is that it uses the
>> > terminology "not full official releases" misleadingly -- but those
>> > should still be "official releases" - just not at a "stable" or
>> > "general availability" maturity level.
>> >
>> > What is NOT ok is to link from the download page to a non-voted on
>> > SNAPSHOT build or similar.   That is quite clearly explained in
>> > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html - but perhaps not on
>> > release-download-pages.html.
>> >
>> > On 7 December 2016 at 12:31, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > The following text is found on
>> > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release-download-pages.html#links (4th
>> bullet
>> > in
>> > > that section)
>> > >
>> > > Artifacts which are not full official releases (for example,
>> milestones,
>> > > betas and alphas) may be linked from the download page. Links to these
>> > > artifacts should be removed in a timely fashion.
>> > >
>> > > I believe it's missing a "not" and should be
>> > >
>> > > Artifacts which are not full official releases (for example,
>> milestones,
>> > > betas and alphas) may not be linked from the download page. Links to
>> > these
>> > > artifacts should be removed in a timely fashion.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
>> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org


Mime
View raw message