couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <>
Subject Re: Binary Downloads
Date Thu, 03 Nov 2011 14:51:23 GMT

On Nov 3, 2011, at 13:08 , Robert Newson wrote:

> I agree we should be supply binary downloads but I'm not comfortable
> with using commercial third parties. Are there ASF rules on this?

I wasn't thinking of any commercial third parties here.

Just archives files the community can provide that are made with
build-couchdb for different platforms.


> B.
> On 3 November 2011 11:35, Jan Lehnardt <> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I think we should start considering providing binary downloads for our users.
>> The whole topic is a bit of a mess (see below), so I'd propose to start small.
>> 1. This first iteration are links from that are clearly
>>   marked as "unofficial 3rd party binary downloads" that are not hosted on
>>   ASF infrastructure.
>> 2. Start with popular platforms.
>> 3. Use the build-couchdb* script to create a fully self-contained directory with
>>   CouchDB and all its dependencies in one place that can be rm -rf'd for
>>   uninstalling.
>> *
>> The above circumvents several things that I hope we can resolve later, but that
>> I don't consider blocking us from getting the above started.
>> A. Official ASF releases. Of course, ideally, we should provide official ASF
>>   binary releases, but I acknowledge that with a small community, we may have
>>   trouble getting votes and testing for all popular platforms together.
>>   The nice thing of the proposal above though is, that we can, at any time
>>   promote an unofficial build to an official one by voting on it and changing
>>   it's label on the downloads page.
>> B. There's many target platforms our users work with and we can't possibly try
>>   to service them all at once. We can grow this operation as we get volunteers
>>   to help out with each platform.
>>   The nice thing here is that we can help a significant portion of users with
>>   relatively little effort.
>> C. Using existing package managers. There are many advantages to use official
>>   package managers for system installation and they should in fact be the
>>   preferred way to set up a system, but they tend to be a little bit behind
>>   with current releases.
>>   I'd be super happy to also work with existing package managers to improve
>>   the situation there, but I consider this to be outside of the scope of this
>>   discussion.
>> What do you think?
>> Cheers
>> Jan
>> --

View raw message