From general-return-66196-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@incubator.apache.org Fri Oct 26 03:39:21 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 2A929180670 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 03:39:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 55262 invoked by uid 500); 26 Oct 2018 01:39:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 55250 invoked by uid 99); 26 Oct 2018 01:39:18 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 01:39:18 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 7245D1A44EA for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 01:39:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.888 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.01] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LIcxIJTqyzp2 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 01:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-it1-f171.google.com (mail-it1-f171.google.com [209.85.166.171]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 45B6C5F42F for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 01:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-it1-f171.google.com with SMTP id k206-v6so3941398ite.0 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 18:39:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Gzih8FssqV3Cfnu19TnMvUcH0ShTRMY5UL+npCvW4Y0=; b=QkTklewBmXZRaxF+SPBXoQDaULWyw6ykN8B1IARqXgnhlbpuah0NVbMW+iLqnO3KmU CCKDNWpfb5oBgsp+NCFDEs2xfubDvnm3SM1SE+BcSU6aINg216SPOQEFyQIrcq6MR28p 4xeVP12wwag0gYHk7te6eI7Lw2GobvOvtWfLOgncdNenI8ZxNGjQi90j22m1y56V3EjK xKHm8WfAvmtoUHMxXmrdrK5iq8RHSbHsHTKpcBW+VvOGNTPjvItdtRsKrl7xLZcei0nD KxiktGrCcYItObNil7vAjB39eFm5RtuWql+wMM0DctawqyIdEiCZQqnZKY9cvj+sb/iR 4fTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=Gzih8FssqV3Cfnu19TnMvUcH0ShTRMY5UL+npCvW4Y0=; b=dEhchGgwCW0R7lnw8ybYQXJhx+mQXjcLQXHufHDSBejE6uLJxDpYpfruOn2n9iYZ3x /AGaVU3ycF3PAZolfQW9IYubSHBU2rw+AKEJpNoFoTJSJd7MaNNPujMFaXBAn29Uy6Nd R5jaDI+EzgTnhxobRLoSVtpZ+4RG+fKQrmR6w96zQCUU0iOc6kwtAiVsdLQ2pQvbknmW TIwNm0+nJi/+Np0dge9w3VCv5bUar7dnRTiEHbuA11UQBd03jOhEwvkvshsD20g0zBUK uLeK8VWyvuj5Hlu3ObdaG9XI6uUsqTDl9qJneE9oq82WX6QbHNCH3iU+Gk40SkB4eBY4 22uQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gLFqcfI1l3ftROCACnZzuFhPrNH4Ob9JXl7xVA3CetNk1g3zvTf xKGmmnJdEyj8Eqgdqd86Lx/Q7uNndmVJjeL/Xw/kgQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5cBO0x69zmilPrsbq03OANUUF8USonwZsJakO0zmCtX8iyae1w9+IpB2Cf9apbgET6nSCkSJROy2YzDhLLuFRk= X-Received: by 2002:a24:4411:: with SMTP id o17-v6mr2430443ita.31.1540517956333; Thu, 25 Oct 2018 18:39:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3433FB52-BCA4-409C-8E6E-3CAFAE19D2CB@apache.org> In-Reply-To: From: Greg Stein Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 20:39:04 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: How to review so-called "binary releases"? To: general@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008eb79c057917c99d" --0000000000008eb79c057917c99d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 12:25 PM Julian Hyde wrote: > Jim, you=E2=80=99re re-iterating the premise of my question. In the conte= xt of my > question, it doesn=E2=80=99t matter what these things are called. But we = need to > know how reviewers are to handle them. > > Since I asked the original question, I have found the following policy[1]= : > > > COMPILED PACKAGES > > > > The Apache Software Foundation produces open source software. All > > releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make > > changes to the software being released. > > > > As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY > > be distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, t= he > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the > > source release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the > > result of compiling that version of the source code release and its > > dependencies. > > This policy clarifies what these things may contain. I still need > clarification on what is the responsibility of a reviewer. It has been repeated several times already. There is no such thing as "reviewer" since these are not official releases. So they certainly shouldn't be voted upon. They are just some binaries hanging out on our server. I propose: > > 1. Reviewers have no way to verify the contents of the binaries and > therefore they have to trust that the release manager has built them > according to the documented release process. > And this is exactly why they are unofficial. -g --0000000000008eb79c057917c99d--