On Mar 29, 2010, at 8:35 PM, David Blevins wrote:

> 
> On Mar 29, 2010, at 3:59 PM, David Jencks wrote:
> 
>> I'd be pretty uncomfortable with a "whipped up" source archive that wasn't 
>> produced by the normal maven release procedure.
> 
> That's perhaps a little too restrictive, but I'll do the best I can.

Sounds like it's too late, but my 2 cents...

I'd agree that a normal maven release procedure would be preferred. However, I 
don't see why it should be *required*. Requiring this would seem a bit counter 
to the notion that we vote on the source archive -- i.e. I don't like this 
source archive, because it doesn't produce a source archive. Many Apache 
projects build a source archive and signature/checksums by hand. 

--kevan

Reply via email to