lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Lucene-java Wiki] Trivial Update of "ReleaseTodo" by YonikSeeley
Date Mon, 20 Sep 2010 19:27:49 GMT

On Sep 20, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Sep 20, 2010, at 2:21 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org>
wrote:
>> While, yes, I will agree it is not official, it is the de facto standard by which
we have done releases and RM's have always worked to it.
> 
> I'd wager that there has never been a single lucene or solr release
> that followed every single instruction to the T.  Which means that
> people need to use their heads and understand that "many of the items
> may be optional, or may be modified as necessary."
> 
> You can't point at the guide as a *reason* to do something, only *how*
> to do something.  If I knew someone would point to it and say "you
> must do XYZ because it's on that HOWTO" then I would have vetoed most
> changes to that page.


As I have said for the 3rd time, of course I get that people need to be flexible and there
has always been an implied "use your head".  But, as I said, given you wrote it on the heels
of the discussion around Maven and that you think we shouldn't publish Maven artifacts, I
think it is clear you intend it to imply that the RM gets to chose what artifacts are released.
 Is that not the case?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message