My bad, our bylaws actually state that release votes must have a minimum
3 days duration.
On 14/06/2022 14:46, Chesnay Schepler wrote:
Yes, pretty much.
Mind you that the 72h voting duration is a recommendation by the ASF;
it's not a strict rule.
AFAICT we also haven't locked this down in our bylaws, apart from
requiring 3 votes.
On 14/06/2022 14:25, Gyula Fóra wrote:
I think what you are referring to is here:
https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#source-packages
Based on this we probably cannot simply release the docker image. We
could
decide to not release the maven artifacts though, but that seems to be a
minor difference and probably not worth it.
Gyula
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 2:19 PM Gyula Fóra <gyf...@apache.org> wrote:
Thanks Chesnay, these are exactly the questions I would like to clarify
because I don't really understand the limitations/boundaries of the
apache
release process.
Is there a strict requirement to have a source release accompany the
docker image? I will have to look this up.
Gyula
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 2:16 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
wrote:
On 14/06/2022 14:10, Gyula Fóra wrote:
For the operator the main logic (and the bugs) are part of the
operator
docker image and the helm charts associated with it. It would be nice
to be
able to have lightweight patch releases that only contain the docker
image + updated Helm chart.
This would allow us to give users new docker image releases in a
short
period of time with reduced testing and voting overhead (these patch
releases could have a shorter voting period also).
I'm not sure if this is allowed because it sounds like you're
proposing
to release binaries without an associated source release
