www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Greg Stein (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-323) Clarify if binary artifacts are part of a release
Date Wed, 02 Aug 2017 09:59:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-323?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16110652#comment-16110652
] 

Greg Stein commented on LEGAL-323:
----------------------------------

It is *impossible* to give a +1 to a binary artifact. Full stop.

Without a full disassembly, reversal to source code, comparison of blah blah blah ... it is
impossible to determine that a given binary artifact represents the *released source code*.
This is why the ASF only releases source code. It is impossible for us to give our name/support
for a given binary artifact.

Speaking as InfraAdmin, we do provide some allowance for convenience binaries, but there have
been lines drawn. The Foundation's goal is to provide *source*, so we will protect the infra
facilities to deliver source, at the possible diminishment of convenience binaries.


> Clarify if binary artifacts are part of a release
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-323
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-323
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: Andrew Wang
>            Assignee: Chris A. Mattmann
>
> Hi,
> Reading the release policy and particularly http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#compiled-packages
I'm still confused as to whether binary artifacts are considered part of a release.
> {quote}
> 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.
> {quote}
> This seems to imply that only the source is the official release. Binary artifacts are
not part of the release, and are just distributed on the side.
> Reading the rest of this page though, it's pretty clear that binary artifacts still need
to adhere to the requirements for release artifacts, e.g. licensing and distribution location.
> What does this mean in practical terms? If we build a tarball with jars and native libraries
in it, is it part of our official release? What about jars uploaded to Maven Central? When
the PMC votes on a release, are we voting on just the source tarball, or also these additional
binary artifacts?
> Thanks,
> Andrew



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

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


Mime
View raw message