Sounds like we should still do them :)
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Ken Wallis <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to Marcel's thoughts. His situation is definitely not unique. ;) > > At minimum I think it would be useful to try and solicit feedback on this > from a wider audience than the dev list. I imagine there are more than just > the watchers on this DL that might be bundling official packages in > downstream distributions. > -- > > Ken Wallis > Senior Product Manager – WebWorks > BlackBerry > 650-620-2404 > > ________________________________________ > From: Marcel Kinard [[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 9:20 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: When to do "Official Apache Releases" > > +1 to still do these for each cadence release. > > I'm in a somewhat unique situation where Cordova gets bundled as a > downstream distribution into a vendor product. The vendor product uses the > Cordova native platforms and core plugins that get embedded in the product, > the product doesn't fetch any code from git or npm. And the product itself > doesn't get installed in an npm-like way. There isn't dynamic updates or > dependency fetching. As we bundle those downstream distributions, I'm very > used to using the official apache release tarballs. > > I'm fine with it being just the native platforms and docs. We don't embed > the Cordova docs in the product, we just link out to > cordova.apache.org/docs. > > And it would feel weird for an Apache project to not publish source > releases. > > I nobody else wants to invest the time to publish an official apache > release to dist.apache.org, then I can own that. > > -- Marcel > > On Sep 3, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It's been mentioned before, but with CLI, there's not a lot of utility in > > doing official apache releases (uploading signed zips to dist.apache.org > ). > > > > I don't think we should stop doing these entirely, but should we still do > > these for each Cadence Release? An alternative would be to do them only > > once / twice a year. > > > > Any thoughts on why / why not? > > > > Andrew > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential > information, privileged material (including material protected by the > solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public > information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended > recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, > please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from > your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this > transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. >
