Hi all IMHO the preview ‘release’ is good at is is now, so no further changes required. For me the preview was a trigger to what will be the next Spark 2.0, really appreciate the effort guys made to describe it and market it:)
I’ll appreciate if the Apache Spark team will start a vote for a new alpha-beta release and point the current status of the project. Since the preview was released there are numerous updates. Best, Ovidiu > On 05 Jun 2016, at 00:42, Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > Artifacts that are not for public consumption shouldn't be in a public > release; this is instead what nightlies are for. However, this was a > normal public release. > > I am not even sure why it's viewed as particularly unsafe, but, unsafe > alpha and beta releases are just releases, and their name and > documentation clarify their status for those who care. These are > regularly released by other projects. > > That is, the question is not, is this a beta? Everyone agrees it > probably is, and is documented as such. > > The question is, can you just not fully release it? I don't think so, > even as a matter of process, and don't see a good reason not to. > > To Reynold's quote, I think that's suggesting that not all projects > will release to a repo at all (e.g. OpenOffice?). I don't think it > means you're free to not release some things to Maven, if that's > appropriate and common for the type of project. > > Regarding risk, remember that the audience for Maven artifacts are > developers, not admins or end users. I understand that developers can > temporarily change their build to use a different resolver if they > care, but, why? (and, where would someone figure this out?) > > Regardless: the 2.0.0-preview docs aren't published to go along with > the source/binary releases. Those need be released to the project > site, though probably under a different /preview/ path or something. > If they are, is it weird that someone wouldn't find the release in the > usual place in Maven then? > > Given that the driver of this was concern over wide access to > 2.0.0-preview, I think it's best to err on the side openness vs some > theoretical problem. > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 11:24 PM, Matei Zaharia <matei.zaha...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Personally I'd just put them on the staging repo and link to that on the >> downloads page. It will create less confusion for people browsing Maven >> Central later and wondering which releases are safe to use. >> >> Matei >> >> On Jun 3, 2016, at 8:22 AM, Mark Hamstra <m...@clearstorydata.com> wrote: >> >> It's not a question of whether the preview artifacts can be made available >> on Maven central, but rather whether they must be or should be. I've got no >> problems leaving these unstable, transitory artifacts out of the more >> permanent, canonical repository. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org
