incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Prescott Nasser <>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote
Date Tue, 21 Aug 2012 02:55:28 GMT
I'm sorry, I'm playing catch-up and I'm a bit unclear on the argument - Marvin said:  "If the
podling believes that ASF-endorsed binaries are a hard requirement,
then it seems to me that the ASF is not yet ready for AOO and will not be
until suitable infrastructure and legal institutions to support binary
releases (sterile build machines, artifact signing, etc) have been created
and a policy has been endorsed by the Board." Is AOO not able to determine that for them a
binary is a hard requirement for their releases (along with source code)? I would think that
ASF puts a minimum requirement on what an official release is, not a limit.  Why is there
a requirement for special infrustructure? (perhaps that is due to the size of AOO?) Speaking
just from the Lucene.Net persective, I would consider our binaries (and nuget packages) as
official - even if ASF does not specifically allow for "official releases or officially endourced
binaries" - what else would they be? They were built and put up by the same guys releasing
the source code.
  I apologize if I misunderstand or mischaracterized anything ~P > Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012
22:33:43 -0400
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote
> From:
> To:
> On Aug 20, 2012 8:33 PM, "Rob Weir" <> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 8:11 PM, Greg Stein <> wrote:
> >...
> > > I would also state that continuing to argue is symptomatic of a
> > > failure to understand and integrate with the Foundation's thoughts on
> > > the matter. Or to at least politely discuss the situation on
> > > legal-discuss.
> >
> > I would say the lack of understanding could be in both directions, and
> > some greater tolerance  would be mutually beneficial.
> I *am* being tolerant (you should see my intolerant emails). And what makes
> you believe that I don't understand? I get to offer my thoughts, and you do
> not get to say that I have a "lack of understanding" simply because you
> disagree.
> > Remember, OpenOffice is unlike anything else previously at Apache.
> Duh. Don't be so patronizing.
> Again: I suggest the discussion about making authorized/authenticated
> binaries be moved to legal-discuss. Not here. Infrastructure may need to
> provide some input, too.
> I might also point you to Sam's recommendation to avoid over-posting to a
> thread as a way to dominate / get your way. How many emails are you up to
> so far?
> -g
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message