Dave Fisher wrote on Wed, 03 Jul 2019 12:16 -0700: > This only works for issues known before a release is cut. It does NOT > WORK if the issue is discovered during the release vote. Why? Because we > are trying to allow the release to go through without redoing it and > this would require reworking the release. > > I would rather do it outside of the release. Policing the actual > DISCLAIMER is not easily feasible and decreases the burden.
I recommend to put the information in DISCLAIMER. Yes, that means bugs in DISCLAIMER require re-rolling, but: 1. Bugs in DISCLAIMER should be found before the first artifact is rolled. It's simply an audit and it can be done directly on the source tree in version control. 2. Re-rolling shouldn't be an expensive step that should be avoided. It should be "Edit DISCLAIMER, commit, run script to roll" followed by everyone diffing the old artifact to the new one and re-casting their votes based on the work they already did to review the old artifact. (And yes, it's still some effort, about which, see #1.) 3. Artifacts should state their exact license terms — accurately, completely, and (de facto standard) in-band. Daniel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
