couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joan Touzet <>
Subject Re: Removal of ibmcom/couchdb3 preview image
Date Tue, 04 Feb 2020 05:05:42 GMT

I didn't specifically go after Will. Will was kind enough to step in and 
help, which is great.

Legal has been very, very clear on this. During my time on the board 
it's come up as well. We do not want to incur their wrath.

We *cannot* be pushing dev or master builds out to the general public. 

Making dev builds available to people who *directly* participate here - 
on dev@couchdb.a.o - is fine. Making it available to the general 
population outside of that mailing list - be that contributors who only 
work on GitHub, people on Slack, Twitter, blogs, etc. is expressly 

I mean, we need more people on dev@ - how about trying to get them to 
come here first? We could have a *passworded* Docker repo and get them 
to pull it from there, that's fine. Or you could just tell people to:

   git clone
   docker build dev -t couchdb:dev
   docker run couchdb:dev

and report issues here. Is 3 lines harder than 1? Not really.

You can go take this up with Legal if you want directly, but I 
anticipate the answer will be a resounding *no*. I'm not going to make 
their argument for them.


On 2020-02-03 6:19 p.m., Adam Kocoloski wrote:
> I pushed for a `couchdb3` preview image — heck, I built the first one myself 6 months
ago (!) and hosted it in my own Docker Hub account. The upcoming CouchDB 3.0 release is better
off for all the little bugs we found and fixed as a result of those pulls. Appropriately documented,
it’s just an alternative version of <>
> If you want to take an IBMer to task for violation of subsection II, part D of some ASF
by-laws, pick me. Will has done a phenomenal job chasing down all our internal teams and encouraging
them to work with us directly and avoid forking codebases or switching databases to meet their
individual roadmaps, and this image was a big assist in that regard.
>   Given that the publication of this image had such a positive effect on the quality
of the software that we *are* releasing, I’d like to see if we can find a way to publish
nightly Docker images in a more suitable location post 3.0. Thanks,
> Adam
>> On Feb 3, 2020, at 1:39 PM, Will Holley <> wrote:
>> Thanks Joan for highlighting the problem; the image has been removed from
>> DockerHub.
>> On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 17:46, Joan Touzet <> wrote:
>>> On 2020-02-03 12:34, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>>>> Thanks Joan for raising this,
>>>> I’m throwing in an extra “this is bad” because of the version number.
>>> 3.0 is not a thing yet and we have brought that up with several IBMers that
>>> calling anything intermediate “CouchDB3” (this is isn’t the first time)
>>> problematic in the CouchDB Slack.
>>>> Y’all need to do better. Is suggest the removal of this image blocks the
>>> 3.0.0 release, to make sure nobody gets the wrong bits.
>>> I agree - I was going to fork 3.x and 3.0.x today but I'll hold off
>>> until this gets resolved. We still have 2 documentation issues that need
>>> to be resolved, and verification of the Windows build, before we can
>>> release anyway.
>>> -Joan
>>>> Best
>>>> Jan
>>>> —
>>>>> On 3. Feb 2020, at 18:08, Joan Touzet <> wrote:
>>>>> Hi IBM people,
>>>>> This is a problem, especially because i'm seeing 50K+ pulls on this
>>> image already.
>>>>> We've not yet released CouchDB 3.0. Any use of this image outside of
>>> our immediate developer community is a direct violation of Apache release
>>> protocols, and could result in serious problems down the road.
>>>>> If you need a dev image for CouchDB to build Fauxton, that's one thing
>>> - but that image needs to be built each time, or hosted on a *private*
>>> repository with credentials.
>>>>> Please take this image offline immediately.
>>>>> -Joan "not messing around" Touzet

View raw message