incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote
Date Mon, 20 Aug 2012 23:33:36 GMT
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 5:04 PM, Rob Weir <> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 4:32 PM, Marvin Humphrey <> wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Rob Weir <> wrote:
>>> Per the IPMC's "Guide to Successful Graduation" [1] this is the
>>> optional, but recommended, community vote for us to express our
>>> willingness/readiness to govern ourselves.  If this vote passes then
>>> we continue by drafting a charter, submitting it for IPMC endorsement,
>>> and then to the ASF Board for final approval.   Details can be found
>>> in the "Guide to Successful Graduation".
>>> Everyone in the community is encouraged to vote.  Votes from PPMC
>>> members and Mentors are binding.  This vote will run 72-hours.
>>> [ ] +1  Apache OpenOffice community is ready to graduate from the
>>> Apache Incubator.
>>> [ ] +0 Don't care.
>>> [ ] -1  Apache OpenOffice community is not ready to graduate from the
>>> Apache Incubator because...
>> In my opinion, the issue of binary releases ought to be resolved before
>> graduation.
>> 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.
>> One possibility discussed in the past was to have downstream commercial
>> vendors release binaries a la Subversion's example, which would
>> obviate the need for all the effort and risk associated with providing support
>> for ASF-endorsed binaries.  For whatever reason, the AOO podling seems not to
>> have gone this direction, though.
> Let's look at the the TLP's that the IPMC has recommended, and the ASF
> Board has approved in recent months.  Notice that a fair number of
> them releae source and binaries, as does the OpenOffice podling:

Some further documentation of IPMC practice in this regard:

> Apache Lucene.Net -- releases source and binaries

IPMC voted to approve release, and vote post pointed to both source
and binary artifacts:

> Apache DirectMemory -- releases source only
> Apache VCL -- releases  source only
> Apache Hama --  releases source and binaries

The people.a.o directory that was voted on by the IPMC is gone now.  I
suspect it included binaries as well. Certainly now that the podling
has graduated their release candidates include binaries:

> Apache MRUnit --  releases source only
> Apache Giraph -- releases source only
> Apache ManifoldCF -- releases source and binaries

Their most recent vote was withdrawn because they graduated before the
vote completed, but that IPMC vote post also pointed to both source
and binary artifacts:

So the recent practice of the IPMC has been to approve releases with
source and binaries, but also to graduate podlings that do so.



> So I'm not quite sure in what way the ASF "is not ready" for a TLP
> that releases binaries, or what additional legal or procedural work
> needs to be done to enable this.  As far as I can tell ASF projects
> release binaries today.
> I agree, sterile buildbots and code signing are good things to have,
> and we are working with Infra on this today, and would continue to
> peruse these avenues as a TLP.
> In any case, shouldn't the question be whether the podling is ready
> for the ASF rather than whether the ASF is ready for the poding? ;-)
> -Rob
>> Marvin Humphrey
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message