Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Message-ID: <713964372.1261368858161.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 04:14:18 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Henri Yandell (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: legal-discuss@apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (LEGAL-34) Release VOTE and svn tag, source
 package, binary package
In-Reply-To: <476235457.1219321724362.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12793075#action_12793075 ] 

Henri Yandell commented on LEGAL-34:
------------------------------------

No idea - all I know is that much as anyone on the PMC would love to give you their opinion on how Apache should do releases and development, I don't see why the above is related to Legal Affairs. Anything we said would just be ignored.

> Release VOTE and svn tag, source package, binary package
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-34
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-34
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Stefano Bagnara
>
> I saw various practices in the ASF about the release vote.
> A. Some PMC vote svn tags and then a release is made and then the src and binary packages generated are not voted before publishing.
> B. Some PMC vote on a source package created from the svn tag and then any other binary package created from that source is published without a vote.
> C. Some PMC vote all of the published content.
> Is there any ASF policy we should be aware before each PMC can decide how to deal with release vote?
> Here is what I found in ASF pages.
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> ---
> 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. In some cases, binary/bytecode packages are also produced as a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to build a compiled version of the source. In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have the same version number as the source release and may only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of compiling that version of the source code release.
> --- 
> Sub-issue: is it ok for a project to publish on www.apache.org/dist an installer created by one contributor based on the released sources and using a commercial installer tool ? Does this require a VOTE ?
> http://markmail.org/message/5agseuhdoyu3fh2x

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


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