Hi Justin,

as there have been a couple of mails on the dev@ list prior to your mail
to general@ list and your mail contains a dramatic opening, I'd like to
provide some context here.

The problem in the current focus is how to ensure the
http://mxnet.apache.org/get_started page is compliant with ASF policies.
The page currently provides names of third-party binary distributions
not controlled by the PPMC which may confuse some users.

Let's take a look at the timeline first:

On May 5th 2020 I have opened LEGAL-515 and asked (among other
questions) how the MXNet PPMC can correctly reference third-party
distributions on the website. Unfortunately that question was not
answered. In fact the majority of questions in LEGAL-515 remained
unanswered throughout May (starting May 8th).

Note that prior to my question in LEGAL-515, the MXNet website has been
mentioning the names of third-party distributions already.

You just now stated:

> You were asked to do something about this a few weeks ago and as far
> as I can see have not done so. Please do so as soon as you can.

That's not entirely correct. I note that there a two different requests.
On May 24th you have contacted the PPMC, requesting the PPMC to (among
other things) improve the clarity of the Getting Started page:

> It also needs to be clear what a user is installed from this install
> page [http://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/get_started]

PPMC has been working on resolving this question in LEGAL-515 since May
5th and has also requested guidance from the trademark@ team. This was
still ongoing at the time of your email today.

Today you have contacted the PPMC with a different request about the
Getting Started page:

> It’s quite clear they should not be linked to from an Apache page
> like this as users will think these are Apache releases. Please remove
> them, after that bring it up on the incubator general list and we can
> discuss what needs to be done.

In response I have asked you, if it wouldn't be possible to first decide
how to properly disclaim links to third-parties on the website, before
removing the links and then potentially adding them back with a
disclaimer later.

This is a very simple question. It's quite late in my timezone and
updating the website will take some time. Why not udpate the website
once correctly instead of taking a route that requires multiple updates?

To resolve the situation, I suggest we start from your statement here:

> No Apache project should be distributing 3rd party releases from their
> web site without clearly informing the users of what they are getting.

Does adding the following notice pior to any mentioning of a third-party
binary release work for clearly informing users?

> WARNING: The following binary release is not provided by the Apache
> Software Foundation and third-party members of the MXNet community.
> They may contain closed-source components with restrictive licenses.
> You may want to download the official Apache MXNet (incubating) source
> release instead and build from source instead.

If so, PPMC can initiate the process of adding this statement to the
website tomorrow. If not, do you have a better suggestion?

And in either case, if the Incubator prefers the route of updating the
website multiple times and leaves a partially empty website in the
intermediate time, then let it be that way and PPMC may initiate that
process tomorrow.


>> I'm not sure what you mean. Note that Github automatically creates these
>> release pages based on the presence of git tags in the version control
>> history.
>
> Yes they do but they consists of Apache releases it looks like you
> have non Apache releases there. Other projects tag these add notes to
> make it very clear they are not Apache releases.

The context here is that I requested you to clarify on your mail from
May 24th in which you stated:

> The GitHub download page [2] is also confusing as it contains a mix of
> Apache and non-Apache releases

My understanding of your statement was that you refer to the source
archives created by Github, which are not the official ASF source
archives. MXNet project uploaded the ASF source archives in addition to
the Github source archives to ensure users can easily discover them. But
it appears this is not what you meant with "confusing" .

But given your response, I now believe you may be referring to git tags
that were made prior to MXNet joining the incubator on 2017-01-23 / on
which no vote by the PPMC took place? Adding notes to those releases can
be done easily if that is what you request.

Best regards
Leonard

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Reply via email to