I do not know the answer.I believe this will be similar to sharing the RC artifacts for validation purposes and would not be a formal release by itself. But I am not an expert and I hope others will share their opinions.
I quickly searched pypi for apache projects and found at least airflow [1] and libcloud [2] are publishing rc artifacts to pypi. We can reach out to those communities and learn about their processes. Ahmet [1] https://pypi.org/project/apache-airflow/#history [2] https://pypi.org/project/apache-libcloud/#history On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 6:15 PM Michael Luckey <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > wouldn't that be in conflict with Apache release policy [1] ? > > [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 1:35 AM Alan Myrvold <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Great idea. I like the RC candidates to follow as much as the release >> artifact process as possible. >> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 3:27 PM Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> To clarify my proposal, I am proposing publishing to the production pypi >>> repository with an rc tag in the version. And in turn allow users to depend >>> on beam's rc version + all the other regular dependencies users would have >>> directly from pypi. >>> >>> Publishing to test pypi repo would also be helpful if test pypi repo >>> also mirrors other packages that exist in the production pypi repository. >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 3:12 PM Pablo Estrada <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I think this is a great idea. A way of doing it for python would be by >>>> using the test repository for PyPi[1], and that way we would not have to do >>>> an official PyPi release, but still would be able to install it with pip >>>> (by passing an extra flag), and test. >>>> >>>> In fact, there are some Beam artifacts already in there[2]. At some >>>> point I looked into this, but couldn't figure out who has access/the >>>> password for it. >>>> >>> >>> I also don't know who owns beam package in test pypi repo. Does >>> anybody know? >>> >>> >>>> >>>> In short: +1, and I would suggest using the test PyPi repo to avoid >>>> publishing to the main PyPi repo. >>>> Best >>>> -P. >>>> >>>> [1] https://test.pypi.org/ >>>> [2] https://test.pypi.org/project/apache-beam/ >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 3:04 PM Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> What do you think about the idea of publishing pre-release artifacts >>>>> as part of the RC emails? >>>>> >>>>> For Python this would translate into publishing the same artifacts >>>>> from RC email with a version like "2.X.0rcY" to pypi. I do not know, but I >>>>> am guessing we can do a similar thing with Maven central for Java >>>>> artifacts >>>>> as well. >>>>> >>>>> Advantages would be: >>>>> - Allow end users to validate RCs for their own purposes using the >>>>> same exact process they will normally use. >>>>> - Enable early-adaptors to start using RC releases early on in the >>>>> release cycle if that is what they would like to do. This will in turn >>>>> reduce time pressure on some releases. Especially for cases like someone >>>>> needs a release to be finalized for an upcoming event. >>>>> >>>>> There will also be disadvantages, some I could think of: >>>>> - Users could request support for RC artifacts. Hopefully in the form >>>>> of feedback for us to improve the release. But it could also be in the >>>>> form >>>>> of folks using RC artifacts for production for a long time. >>>>> - It will add toil to the current release process, there will be one >>>>> more step for each RC. I think for python this will be a small step but >>>>> nevertheless it will be additional work. >>>>> >>>>> For an example of this, you can take a look at tensorflow releases. >>>>> For 1.13 there were 3 pre-releases [1]. >>>>> >>>>> Ahmet >>>>> >>>>> [1] https://pypi.org/project/tensorflow/#history >>>>> >>>>
