incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Drop incubating requirement of Maven artifacts
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2017 11:47:30 GMT
I'll point out that this is a cancel thread..., I'm fine if people want to
continue chatting in here, but I started a new discussion on
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/15550f5bf622ae3070b558505c8a0fd0ce3b23df3012d57de8b6d9f3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E

I'll try to answer questions I saw pop up

Mark Struberg: No, ignoring commons/log4j for a minute, other projects
continue to work under legacy maven coordinates.  Includes one i already
linked to - groovy, also freemarker, zest/polygene (a project that went
straight to TLP).  There's neither foundation policy nor legal impact by
using other very similar marks, especially when the project's name hasn't
changed.  Publishing under "com.oracle.someProduct" would probably be bad
from a marks standpoint since it shows as property of some other company,
whereas former foundations or completely independent projects.  Plus, the
way maven central works you own the entire tld, except for cases where its
a known third party publisher.  For instance, I own (personally) the domain
name ament.ws and have access to publish under maven coordinates
ws.ament.*.  Github users have to request io.github.themselves manually.  I
assume that something similar exists between the ASF and Sonatype to enable
publishing under org.apache, and ensure that no one else can use org.apache.

Pierre Smits: This is something I expected to be a hot topic.  So while
100% consensus isn't expected, a clear path forward is something to expect,
even if not everyone is happy about the outcome.  FWIW, there seem to be 3
different POVs (that I could identify) on those who were against the idea:

- Those who thought this was dropping -incubating from the Apache release
archive.
- Those who acknowledged that this was maven specific and felt it should
continue as is.
- Those who acknowledged that this was currently maven specific and should
be made broader.

John


On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:49 AM Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dashorst@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Late to the party, but having a long think about this is sometimes
> beneficial.
>
> +1 to drop the -incubator/-incubating version attachment for any
> artifacts (not just Maven).
>
> My reasoning is the following:
>
> Source code lives longer than any community. Long after a podling has
> gone through the incubator, the code remains. The releases remain. How
> a community conducts itself doesn't reflect on the released code. Code
> just exists.
>
> While it is important for current users coming to a project to know
> the status of the community, does it really matter if the code is in
> incubation or has graduated? Does that matter in 5 years whether the
> code of foo-1.2 was incubating while the community has graduated and
> now resides in the attic?
>
> Releases have a long life. Code has a long life. We shouldn't mix
> timely things like project status with long lived things like
> releases. Websites are examples of timely, short lived documents and
> incubation status is a (relatively) short lived state in the long
> lives of projects. We shouldn't burden the long lived artifacts with
> the orthogonal status of a project.
>
> Martijn
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 6:22 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > I'm calling to vote on a proposed policy change.  Current guide at [1]
> > indicates that maven artifacts should include incubator (or incubating)
> in
> > the version string of maven artifacts.  Its labeled as a best practice,
> not
> > a requirement and is not a policy followed on other repository management
> > tools (e.g. PyPi).
> >
> > I therefore push forward that the incubator will cease expecting
> java-based
> > projects to publish artifacts with "-incubating" in the version string,
> > with the understanding that:
> >
> > - Incubating is a term used to refer to a project's stability, not a
> > release's stability.  It is generally understood that incubating projects
> > are not necessarily immature, but may have a potential of failing to
> become
> > a TLP.
> > - Podling releases are endorsed, the podling itself is not endorsed.  We
> > will not approve releases that are blatantly against ASF policies.
> >
> >
> > [ ] +1 Drop the -incubator/-incubating expectation of maven projects
> > [ ] +/0
> > [ ] -1 Don't drop because....
> >
> >
> > [1]:
> > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/release-java.html#best-practice-maven
>
>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

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