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 11:34:41 GMT
On 8 December 2016 at 02:01, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:52 PM sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>
>
> So how about...
>
>
> (bullet 4)           - Only release artifacts that have been approved by
> the relevant PMC may be linked from the download page.

I would put that as the first bullet point as it is the most important
to get across.

> (bullet 5 - new) - All official pre-releases (e.g. milestones, alphas,
> betas) must removed in a timely fashion once the final or GA version has
> been released.

+1

> It seems to me that the current bullet 4 is blending two problems, or maybe
> I'm making it up in my head.

I don't think it does mix issues. It only talks about non-GA releases,
but does so ambiguously.

> John
>
>
>>
>> > ?
>> >
>> > 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
>>
>>

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


Mime
View raw message