Just discovered another important aspect of a release that is often overlooked.
The current source release artifacts must be released via the ASF mirroring system. Download pages must not point directly to the ASF servers; they must use the mirror CGI scripts Also old releases must not be left on the mirroring system; any download links must use the ASF archive server. The download pages must also include links to sigs and hashes and the KEYS file, all of which must be on the ASF servers (not via mirrors). There were at least two recent graduations that do (did) not follow these rules. One provided links to the SVN dist/release area, the other links directly to www.apache.org/dist On 13 December 2013 17:48, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > The N word wasn't particularly helpful or constructive, sorry. I do think > the policy page should be kept simple and generic though, so isn't the > place to be describing this experiment. > > ...ant > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 3:39 PM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Well sorry but IMHO thats nonsense. The Maven decision was an isolated >> incident and didn't change the way all future Incubator policy should >> get decided. Insisting that this experiment is done via a change to >> the main policy just makes it contentious when it doesn't need to be. >> All the complexity in the language and approach, the three votes etc >> is exactly why people get the idea that the ASF is a ridiculous place >> with overbearing rules and process. Its just an experiment, use lazy >> majority consensus and go try it with a podling. >> >> ...ant >> >> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com> >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:18 AM, ant elder <ant.el...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I'm also opposed to updating the policy document, so will be voting >> against >> >> this just for that. Its just an experiment so you don't need to be >> making a >> >> permanent change to the policy page to try it, especially as its such a >> >> clunky convoluted change. >> > >> > An explicit policy change is required because otherwise there would be >> > ambiguity as to whether a release which passes under the modified regime >> is an >> > act of the Foundation and confers indemnity on the Release Manager. >> > >> > The language of the proposed change to the Policy page has been carefully >> > composed. It is highly isolated from the rest of our policy and has no >> force >> > except on the the experiment. >> > >> > This proposal is structured as an incremental, reversible change. It is >> > incremental because podlings must be opted in by vote of the IPMC to >> > participate. It is reversible because once the experiment has run its >> course >> > the relevant section of the policy page can be removed with zero impact >> > through lazy consensus. >> > >> >> (And responding to another related comment in the thread - since when >> have >> >> policy updates not required consensus?) >> > >> > The 2008 proposal to allow distribution through Maven was enacted after a >> > contentious majority-rule vote passed 15 to 12. >> > >> > Marvin Humphrey >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
