www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Continuous release review
Date Thu, 29 May 2014 16:05:04 GMT
I wonder also if there is a requirement for the "build" in "download, build
and test"... in which case it's just download and test against the legal
requirements for a release...

the build and verify the built software works is mostly a moral
requirement... but being technical and moral folks we seem to favour
focusing on this part

On 29 May 2014 17:02, Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.connolly@gmail.com>

> My understanding of the "test" in "download, build and test" is test the
> source bundle against the *legal* requirements. I don't think there is any
> legal requirement for us to ship working software... only moral
> requirements ;-)
> On 29 May 2014 16:48, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>> (Trying to reel this thread back into productivity)
>> Apache is supposed to be a meritocracy where issues are discussed on the
>> merits.  Short answers of just "No" without justification doesn't help,
>> nor does telling someone they are pounding their head in the sand.
>> Also, can we table the discussion of how we might change these
>> requirements, or at least, fork it to a new thread?   I imagine changing
>> these requirements will take a long time, and I am more interested in
>> understanding what we can do under the current rules.
>> So Jim, please explain to me, a new member, what are the "merits" of
>> requiring that PMC members download, build, and test?  Is it just
>> statistical probability that some platform or machine-specific issue might
>> get found before release?
>> What does it mean to "test"?  Can it be a simple smoke test, or testing of
>> some simple application against the built sources?
>> Can these steps be done automatically and just generate a report for
>> review or is there some value to having to manually execute these steps?
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>> On 5/29/14 8:31 AM, "Emmanuel Lécharny" <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >Le 29/05/2014 16:04, Jim Jagielski a écrit :
>> >> FWIW, my response could be:
>> >>
>> >>   You can pound your head in the sand, expecting that every release
>> >>   does not need to be downladed, compiled, tested by every PMC member
>> >>   casting a +1, or simply accept the idea that, yes, an automated and
>> >>   potentially buggy CI process is no substitute for a healthy, engaged
>> >>   and responsible PMC.
>> >>
>> >> See how I did that?
>> >Sure.
>> >
>> >But I can check a CI script, when I can't be on every PMC's back to
>> >double check that they are doing their homeworks.
>> >
>> >Anticpiating your answer, yes, I know, *if* I do the chekcs myself, I
>> >will be able to know that X Y or Z is not fulfilling his/her duty. And
>> >now what ? Should I tell them to either comply, or stop casting a vote ?
>> >
>> >
>> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> >For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message