couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Archive Apache CouchDB 1.2.1
Date Sun, 26 May 2013 13:56:26 GMT
My point is: it's has already been removed. So I'm wondering if you think
we should move it back. We've never done something like this, so I wanna be
sure what you're proposing. :)


On 26 May 2013 14:50, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:

>
> On May 26, 2013, at 09:47 , Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > You make a compelling argument, Jan. Do you think we should move the
> 1.2.2
> > release back into the dist dir, or should we just keep this in mind for
> > future releases?
>
> I don’t think it is too much effort to keep it around, is it?
>
> Best
> Jan
> --
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > On 26 May 2013 14:44, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On May 23, 2013, at 08:20 , Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dave,
> >>>
> >>> See the following thread:
> >>>
> >>> [DISCUSS] Release clean-up (delete ALL the branches!)
> >>> http://markmail.org/message/rrz5yl6fig2vnfu5
> >>>
> >>> Specifically, my proposal to drop support for the 1.2.x line for the
> >>> following reasons:
> >>>
> >>> * The 1.2.x line is over a year old
> >>> * The 1.3.x line is upwards compatible
> >>>
> >>> On 23 May 2013 10:30, Dave Cottlehuber <dch@jsonified.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> But does that mean we only keep the latest version on the mirrors?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Yep.
> >>>
> >>> But... All of the 1.2.x releases are available here:
> >>>
> >>> http://archive.apache.org/dist/couchdb/
> >>>
> >>> What I am proposing we do is that when we drop support* for a release,
> we
> >>> remove it from our active dist dir. The files will always be available
> in
> >>> our archive dist dir, so the releases are still available, should you
> >> need
> >>> them.
> >>>
> >>> What we want to avoid is people going to our active dist dir, seeing
> >> 1.2.2
> >>> and thinking "ah, this is a supported release. I'll download and
> install
> >>> it." Because at this point, we don't want people to do that any more.
> (We
> >>> want them do use 1.3.0.)
> >>
> >> People don’t go to dist/ folders. They click on links on the website or
> >> type `apt-get install couchdb`. I don’t think “making dist/ look recent”
> >> is a primary objective here.
> >>
> >> In fact, I think there is a danger / inconvenience here. We have little
> >> control over what downstream packagers reference, let alone, what state
> >> downstream user’s package repository references are in. I recently had
> >> a support case where we had one tarball removed from dist and the person
> >> still had a little bit out of date (but not by much) brew repo, so
> >> `brew install couchdb` failed with tarball not found, which doesn’t make
> >> obvious that `brew update` (refreshing the available package list) would
> >> help.
> >>
> >> I am sure someone can find someone else to blame for this, but I am not
> >> interested in that, I am just concerned with the experience of our users
> >> and we’d have a better situation, if we had them let install a slightly
> >> (it was a .z-level version bump) out of date version than the
> >> *very* latest.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> tl;dr: Supporting a release is different from keeping a tarball around
> >> on its original release URL and I think the latter timeframe should be
> >> longer.
> >>
> >> Best
> >> Jan
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> * When I say "drop support" I mean "we don't backport features or
> >> bugfixes
> >>> to this line any more".
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> My apologies if we've already agreed this & it is just sinking into
my
> >>>> little bear brain today.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> No worries. It seems this has caught a few people by surprise. We're
> >>> changing a system we've been using for half a decade, so that's to be
> >>> expected. :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> TL;DR does it make sense to keep the n and n-1 active releases on the
> >>>> mirrors, or shall I just point people to
> >>>> http://archive.apache.org/dist/couchdb/binary/win/1.2.2/  etc? Maybe
> >>>> add a link on our website?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Why would we want to keep n-1 active release on the mirrors?
> >>>
> >>> We shouldn't be encouraging anybody to download 1.2.2 any longer, so
> why
> >>> would we want to keep it around?
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> NS
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > NS
>
>


-- 
NS

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