Yup. Subversion 1.6.9 was released while we were incubating. Further: Subversion 1.6.x had patch releases for three years (given our support rules), after we became Apache Subversion. 1.7.0 was our first Apache release, occurring about 18 months after we became a TLP. We distinguished them by name (Subversion vs Apache Subversion), and by release channel/host (tigris.org vs apache.org). The same people happened to work on both releases, but we made sure to distinguish non-Foundation releases.
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Joe Schaefer <joes...@gmail.com> wrote: > Subversion cut a release while in incubation on their old system. > Shouldn't pose a problem for others. > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Todd Lipcon <t...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hey folks, > > > > Hopefully quick policy question here: > > > > Once a project is under proposal for incubation, what is the foundation > > policy on that project making releases outside of Apache from its current > > home? > > > > For example, suppose there's an open source project FooBar, with a public > > release FooBar 1.0.0 in use by various people out in the world. FooBar is > > then proposed to the incubator. During the discussion/voting timeframe, > > someone discovers a bug in FooBar 1.0.0, and the team would like to > release > > FooBar 1.0.1 from the project's current home (eg github). Would this be > an > > issue? > > > > More controversial variant: > > > > How about early during the incubation period, while the project is still > in > > the process of transitioning the necessary infrastructure, etc, into the > > ASF repositories? Assuming that the project is making good faith efforts > > towards making a release compatible with ASF guidelines, would it be > > allowed to make "external" releases during this initial period of > > incubation, for the purposes of bug fixes? > > > > Thanks > > Todd > > >