I have added comments on the proposed document. I don't think we should make it compulsory to include scripts to rebuild binaries used in the projects. It is a maintenance nightmare.
I agree though that we need a proper definition for the "convenience packages" and some guidelines around Docker Image and Helm Chart. Regards, Kaxil Apache Airflow PMC On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 3:14 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > @Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> - absolutely, thanks for mentioning that. > My intention is to hash-out as many details as possible and get as much > input as possible from relevant people to make a strong case to the board. > While I am not an ASF member myself, just a PMC, I watched some of the > Apache Con talks and I understand that board operates in asynchronous mode > and that they should get an information that they could digest earlier, > offline and make decisions quickly, so I want to make everything to make it > clear and straightforward and - possibly have a strong case, supported, or > at least with very limited number of strong "no" opinions, so I am still in > the phase of involving people and gathering feedback. > > @Justin - I read it and I think this is all really great. I think it very > nicely documents the current policies and beyond, there is only one thing > in both - current release policies and the incubator distribution > guidelines that are a bit contradictory and I hope part of my proposal for > policy update addresses. And I know it's the toughest one. > It's about category X software inclusion in binary convenience packages. As > I see it is pretty much impossible not to include category X software in a > docker image. Since they are Linux-kernel based usually there are always > some GPL licensed libraries included in those. > > While I perfectly understand that "COMPILED PACKAGES" should not contain > Category X software, I think "Docker images" (and likely other binary > distribution mechanisms - for example those that package software for > installation on Windows/Mac workstation) can - and it should be allowed. > Unfortunately according to the policies "Convenience binaries need to > follow licensing policy and not include any category X licensed software." > > So the really only thing I am looking for is to introduce a separate > category for those different "packaging mechanism" and separate them out > (and explicitly name as category). For now we either release "software" or > "convenience binaries". And docker images are neither. > > J, > > > > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 3:14 AM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > I am not even sure myself if I am the only one who feels the > > disconnection > > > between reality and the current policies, that's why I started the > thread > > > here. > > > > You would not be the only person who set this. People and project are > > making small steps to correct this. Recently Infra’s distribution policy > > was updated and the Incubator made these guidelines. [1] Note that Infra > do > > support docker as a platform. > > > > Thanks, > > Justin > > > > 1. https://incubator.apache.org/guides/distribution.html > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org > > > > > > -- > +48 660 796 129 >
