www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian Fox <bri...@infinity.nu>
Subject Re: Clarification on the release requirements
Date Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:18:49 GMT

Joe Schaefer wrote:
>> It may be a ridiculous stretch, but the point I get from it is that each build 
>> has slightly different requirements for what should and shouldn't be required to

>> be released. We should leave it up to the PMCs to decide based on some 
>> underlying fundamental rules.
> I don't think you've said anything new in the above, since Roy seems to be stating
> what those rules actually are.  
Roy laid out a process as opposed to a set of guidelines that can be 
used by projects to define an adequate process. There's a big difference 
imo. If what Roy wrote down is the process and gospel, then fine, it 
should be engraved in stone. However, like I said before, since it 
apparently hasn't been operating this way foundation wide for some 
period of time, perhaps some discussion is required to get to a set of 
guidelines everyone can live with. This is so far the start of the 
discussion. I imagine once we can agree on some guidelines, they would 
need to be written up and seen by a wider audience.
> If there's some discrepancy in the documentation
> of those rules at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html, than IMO that should be
> raised on the infrastructure@ list, since it is infra who oversees the contents of
> that url.
That would be the logical conclusion to the problem, but i'm not sure 
Infra is the correct location to define the content, merely to get it 
applied once decided.
> And nothing.  Apache has several Perl projects that work in exactly that way, and
> most of the time we Perl hackers are rather non-plussed about what all the arguing
> is about in the Java community regarding release process. 
It's simple. We're trying to produce a set of tools that encapsulate 
industry best practices for our users. We also happen to be our own 
users and have other ASF users so it would be nice to completely 
understand the requirements to build the correct tools. Maven 
specifically is constantly hit with statements like in the previous 
maven release thread that claim Maven doesn't do it right. Well, if you 
look at the current documentation it's not surprising because it's 
vague. If the intent is to make them vague and leave it to the PMC, 
fine, say so clearly. Otherwise lets make sure everyone agrees so we can 
fix it once and for all. Ignoring it doesn't solve anything.

If we don't do anything about the perceived problems, we're called 
negligent. If we start a discussion to try and get to the bottom of it, 
we're arguing. I guess it's lose lose either way, but I for one would 
like to lose by getting to some set of guidelines that everyone can 
agree upon and then go build the tools.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message