cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: When to do "Official Apache Releases"
Date Tue, 10 Sep 2013 19:21:21 GMT
Sounds like we should still do them :)


On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Ken Wallis <kwallis@blackberry.com> wrote:

> +1 to Marcel's thoughts. His situation is definitely not unique. ;)
>
> At minimum I think it would be useful to try and solicit feedback on this
> from a wider audience than the dev list. I imagine there are more than just
> the watchers on this DL that might be bundling official packages in
> downstream distributions.
> --
>
> Ken Wallis
> Senior Product Manager – WebWorks
> BlackBerry
> 650-620-2404
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Marcel Kinard [cmarcelk@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 9:20 AM
> To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> Subject: Re: When to do "Official Apache Releases"
>
> +1 to still do these for each cadence release.
>
> I'm in a somewhat unique situation where Cordova gets bundled as a
> downstream distribution into a vendor product. The vendor product uses the
> Cordova native platforms and core plugins that get embedded in the product,
> the product doesn't fetch any code from git or npm. And the product itself
> doesn't get installed in an npm-like way.  There isn't dynamic updates or
> dependency fetching. As we bundle those downstream distributions, I'm very
> used to using the official apache release tarballs.
>
> I'm fine with it being just the native platforms and docs. We don't embed
> the Cordova docs in the product, we just link out to
> cordova.apache.org/docs.
>
> And it would feel weird for an Apache project to not publish source
> releases.
>
> I nobody else wants to invest the time to publish an official apache
> release to dist.apache.org, then I can own that.
>
> -- Marcel
>
> On Sep 3, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > It's been mentioned before, but with CLI, there's not a lot of utility in
> > doing official apache releases (uploading signed zips to dist.apache.org
> ).
> >
> > I don't think we should stop doing these entirely, but should we still do
> > these for each Cadence Release? An alternative would be to do them only
> > once / twice a year.
> >
> > Any thoughts on why / why not?
> >
> > Andrew
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential
> information, privileged material (including material protected by the
> solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public
> information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended
> recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error,
> please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from
> your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this
> transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
>

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