Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55BF3A8D.9020701@gmx.org>
References: <55BF3A8D.9020701@gmx.org>
From: David Nalley <david@gnsa.us>
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 15:46:03 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAKprHVZjXEJ=XbWXdw4WORGc78yyuEHkkB4KKwmnu+6i0KLVBg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: apache binary distributions
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Jochen Theodorou <blackdrag@gmx.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> some of the general discussion recently made me wonder about one point with
> regards to binary distributions. It was pointed out, that a binary
> distribution of a source code release has to be handled like a release
> itself, and that there should be no download source of it outside of apache.
> This seems to be one motivation for the asf having its own maven repository.
>
> I seem to misunderstand something here, or why can there be apache maven
> artifacts in maven central and package in linux distributions for for
> example httpd, if this policy is followed? I mean it was even suggested to
> use the trademark to forbid the distribution through third parties. I am
> quite irritated about this.
>
> bye blackdrag
>

I am not aware of any policy that dictates that (but would love to see links.)
I am aware that releases MUST at least be distributed via
dist.apache.org [1], but that isn't exclusive, meaning the PMC is
welcome to distribute _released software_ via other means (PyPy, NPM,
Maven, Docker Registry, CPAN, Bintray, carrier pigeon, etc).

--David
[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#where-do-releases-go

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