On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 at 18:35, Matt Juntunen <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree that this issue should be addressed. However, is this > something that needs to be done for this release, especially > considering that this is a long-standing issue and the documentation > in question is accessible in other locations? Having read the official guidelines I do not think it is a blocker. The official release must contain a source distribution which contains everything required to build and test the release. The binary distribution is optional [1]. There is nothing mandated about what should be in the binary distribution other than it must have the same version number and be the result of compiling from the version of the source code that matches the (source) release. So at present the binary distribution has convenience jars and some of the site as documentation, including the user guide. The tarball is bigger than it needs to be and has some things that are not useful. But it is not incorrect. Given that including the entire site in the binary distribution is wasteful, and including the javadoc directory is duplication of the packaged javadoc jars, it makes sense going forward to remove site or javadoc directories from the binary distribution and leave it as the NOTICE, LICENSE and binary jar files (classes, javadoc, sources) for all modules. An aggregate javadoc built across all released packages in a multi-module project is useful but should be a feature to be built from the source. I do not see the need to release it. Alex [1] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#compiled-packages
