Speaking as a member of a currently-incubating project (Apache Druid) where we have always strived to do releases with no known licensing issues, the text sounds needlessly scary to downstream consumers. Especially this part:
> If you are planning to incorporate this work into your > product/project, please be aware that you will need to conduct a > thorough licensing review to determine the overall implications of > including this work. IMO this disclaims too much, and would chill adoption of incubating software by people that care about having clean licensing. PPMCs should be able to say "we believe this release is clean and have vetted it using a normal Apache vetting process" or maybe even "we have vetted this release and it is clean other than the following list of known issues". If they can't say one of those two statements, then maybe it's not time to do their first release yet. And yeah, as a few others have mentioned, I believe that a more streamlined voting process would make PPMCs more likely to adopt an attitude of doing releases as cleanly as possible. I think mentors could play a valuable part in streamlining the process, since they have binding votes from both the PPMC and IPMC perspective, and are in theory plugged in to both communities. On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 7:44 AM Jan Piotrowski <piotrow...@gmail.com> wrote: > What is the requirement for this disclaimer text change? > Is this coming from Legal? Or is this Incubator policy? > Has this been decided on already or is this text suggestion to be used > for a decision? > > J > > Am Mi., 10. Juli 2019 um 15:50 Uhr schrieb Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>: > > > > Since this is sort of a post-release set of info, I think it’d make sense > > to have either a page specific to each version, or at least a section per > > version all on a single page (similar to a security issues page might be > or > > a change log in general). > > > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 21:24, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > The issue with having a detached disclaimer is that it can change and > get > > > out of sync with what was actually in a released version. > > > > > > However one possible compromise would be to list known issues in the > > > disclaimer and list any other issues found by the IPMC in the release > > > announcements and on the release page next to the download links. The > > > DISCLAIMER in version control can also be updated and always reflect > the > > > current set of released issues are. What do other people think about > this? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Justin > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > -- > > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
