To wrap this up -- agree with you, was just trying to clarify this (even further and maybe ultimately only for my own understanding), and thanks for all your great work.
Gj On Tue, Apr 14, 2026 at 12:50 PM Neil C Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 14 Apr 2026 at 11:17, Geertjan Wielenga > <[email protected]> wrote: > > The 2nd is the one I've been assuming, i.e., we can link to convenience > > binaries, which are not release artifacts (only source code is release > > artifacts), and the ASF is silent on the requirements, if any, for these, > > though I do think we need to have our own policy for this (so as to avoid > > anyone at all demanding the right to list their random artifact for > > download from our download page). > > Well, the first is the one that I'm assuming is intended, and there > are not many ASF projects that stray from that. We looked around for > precedent when deciding whether to link the community installers in > the first place. > > We've had a policy in place since these were first added. We've > always been clear that any PMC member can take part and do likewise. > Why are we discussing loosening that policy now? I don't object to > formalising this further. I do object to saying that all the work > I've been doing over the last 5 years to keep these close to ASF > release policies was unnecessary! These are a way to distribute > bundled with Cat-X binaries, not reduce the work we have to do. > > Yes, it does not help that convenience binaries both are and aren't > release artifacts depending on which pages you read—Schrödinger's > binaries. :-) > > Best wishes, > > Neil > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists > > > >
