incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>
Subject Re: apache binary distributions
Date Mon, 17 Aug 2015 00:59:28 GMT
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
> Seems like for the past two weeks I only have weekends to respond :-(
> Apologies for the delay on this thread.
>
> On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > 1) The concept of a brand covering some artifact doesn't come into play
>>> at
>>> > all. Instead, there are two things that happen.  The first is that the
>>> PMC
>>> > approves releases which defines each such release as an Apache release.
>>> > The second process is that the ASF controls the use of its trademarks.
>>>
>>> The question is: do we have ASF-wide trademark guidelines or do
>>> we allow each PMC to make those as they go.
>>>
>>
>> Yes. We do have ASF-wide trademark guidelines and we also allow PMC's to
>> have pretty broad latitude within those boundaries.  The PMC definitely
>> should not be making things up, but they do have a lot of responsibility
>> for deciding what they don't like.
>
> I don't think I was clear: I understand that ASF has foundation-wide
> trademark guidelines, what I was asking is: are we allowing PMCs
> to put additional constraints on top of those.

Yes, off hand I know of two PMCs that have additional, or more rigid
trademark guidelines in place.



>
>> How is the release policy not clear (
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distribute-other-artifacts) when it
>> says:
>>
>>All releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make changes
>> > to the software
>>
>>
>>
>>And then it says
>>
>>In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have the same version
>> number as the source release and may only add binary/bytecode files that
>> are the result of compiling that version of the source code release.
>
> Right. So what happens to at least 4 different (and I do mean different) ways
> of building Hadoop? Are these all different distributions? Do ALL of them
> need to be blessed by PMC?
>
>> The Hadoop PMC is utterly free to produce a Hadoop RPM with Hadoop in it
>> that corresponds to an Apache Hadoop release.  Having project Foo produce a
>> release of Bar, Baz and Pigdog is pretty far off the reservation, however.
>
> It is. But if they screw up packaging guidelines inadvertently and the
> downstream
> want to take matters in their own hands -- how is it "off the reservation"?
>
> Remember -- we're still talking producing binary packages from exact same
> source release that PMC blessed -- just using different build and packaging
> mechanics.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message