Hi everyone,
The release management guide [1] only mentions 'source releases'. Every Apache
project that I am familiar with also does binary releases. For applications,
this makes sense - having a zip/tgz file that you can download and extract -
that you can then readily start the application us
Hi PJ,
Only source releases are required. Apache Kvrocks (Incubating) release
2.1.0 (the first Apache release) with sources only, although there's a
following vote for Docker release due to user's requirement :)
You may refer to:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/v63xyr8rw5o7h0flt3fx3mrn9vxsyskm
h
Hi
Only source codes(tars) are treated as releases. So generally, you
could only put the source tars as the vote releases.
Meanwhile, we should check the runtime dependencies about License
compatibility, such as no Catalog X or commercial license dependencies
in the runtime(especially not optiona
Hi PJ,
Daffodil uses sbt and produces binary releases -
https://daffodil.apache.org/releases/3.4.0/
- https://GitHub.com/Apache/daffodil/
Best,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 8, 2023, at 6:33 AM, PJ Fanning wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
> The release management guide [1] only mentions 'source
It’s useful to clarify the terminology. There’s no such thing as a “binary
release”. Release policy [1] says:
> Every ASF release MUST contain one or more source packages
> All releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make
changes
> to the software being released.
>
> As a conve
Thanks Julian for clarifying the terminology.
I think the general consensus in the Pekko team is that there is no call for
creating binary artifacts distributions (example [1]).
The initial user base of Pekko are users who currently use Akka but dislike the
move to Business Source License 1.1.
Isn't staging for release on maven central the same as creating binary
convenience artifacts?
Staging to the ASF nexus to then be pushed to maven central is part of your
release process [1]
Cheers,
Hans
[1] https://infra.apache.org/publishing-maven-artifacts.html
On Wed, 8 Feb 2023 at 20:15, P
Thanks Hans. That would be the general plan with the Maven jar part of
our releases.
* as part of the RC where we stage a source release for people to vote
on, we will also push jars to repository.apache.org staging repo
* if the vote on the source release passes, we will release the source
release
Hi,
Those jars are likely to have different LICENSE and NOTICE files so I would
suggest you vote on both at the same time.
Kind Regards,
Justin
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional co
Hi Justin,
I'm struggling to find any examples of ASF jars pushed to maven
central that have anything other than the standard boilerplate Apache
LICENSE and NOTICE. Having a transitive dependency on another jar
doesn't appear to be mentioned in any jar LICENSE/NOTICE that I
checked.
Having code fr
HI,
> I'm struggling to find any examples of ASF jars pushed to maven
> central that have anything other than the standard boilerplate Apache
> LICENSE and NOTICE. Having a transitive dependency on another jar
> doesn't appear to be mentioned in any jar LICENSE/NOTICE that I
> checked.
See [1]. I
11 matches
Mail list logo