You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ignite.apache.org by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> on 2015/03/10 09:52:17 UTC
Re: Downloads on the web site
On 10.03.2015 09:44, Branko Čibej wrote:
> Can you guys please remove the download link to RC1 from the Ignite web
> site. It's never been released and the link there is extremely confusing
> to potential users, who may think that it is an ASF release.
Furthermore, download links should never point at the ASF servers but at
the closest mirror. And mirrors are only populated from released versions.
-- Brane
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
Good news, thanks for the update
On Wednesday, March 11, 2015, Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Never mind, I found the answer that GPL with CPE is not allowed.
>
> However, all classes under "org.apache.ignite.jdk8.backport" package have
> also been released by Doug Lee to the public domain under "CC0 1.0
> Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication" with the following language:
> ----
> *Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166*
> *Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at*
> *http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
> <http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/>*
> ----
>
> I think we are OK. I will update the Notice file.
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> dsetrakyan@gridgain.com <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > I have a question. We actually do have some back-ported code from OpenJdk
> > 8 which is licensed under GPL with CPE (Class Path Exception). Is it OK
> to
> > have a dependency on GPL w/ CPE in the source code or do we have to
> remove
> > it from the source code?
> >
> > D.
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> dsetrakyan@apache.org <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Brane, let me review the docs and get back to you.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <brane@apache.org
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> >>> > Brane,
> >>> >
> >>> > The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
> >>> for a
> >>> > vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines
> >>> here
> >>> > that we are not aware of.
> >>>
> >>> It's all documented here:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> >>>
> >>> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> >>>
> >>> Do not include any links on the project website that might
> encourage
> >>> non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> >>> release candidates, or any other similar package.
> >>>
> >>> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> >>> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> >>> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> >>> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> >>>
> >>> > Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to
> kick
> >>> the
> >>> > tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0
> >>> release is
> >>> > out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user
> >>> base of
> >>> > the Ignite project.
> >>>
> >>> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> >>> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
> >>> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> >>> confusing links to the web site.//
> >>>
> >>> > As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> >>> couple
> >>> > of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> >>> become
> >>> > an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just
> >>> switch one
> >>> > zip archive with another when that happens.
> >>>
> >>> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
> >>> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
> >>> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
> >>> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users
> and
> >>> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I
> really
> >>> don't want to do that myself.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments
> on
> >>> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> >>> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> >>>
> >>> -- Brane
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>.
If ever in doubt - here's the licensing page from ASF legal@
http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
Thanks for resolving the issue, Dmitriy!
Cos
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 06:17PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> Never mind, I found the answer that GPL with CPE is not allowed.
>
> However, all classes under "org.apache.ignite.jdk8.backport" package have
> also been released by Doug Lee to the public domain under "CC0 1.0
> Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication" with the following language:
> ----
> *Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166*
> *Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at*
> *http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
> <http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/>*
> ----
>
> I think we are OK. I will update the Notice file.
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@gridgain.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I have a question. We actually do have some back-ported code from OpenJdk
> > 8 which is licensed under GPL with CPE (Class Path Exception). Is it OK to
> > have a dependency on GPL w/ CPE in the source code or do we have to remove
> > it from the source code?
> >
> > D.
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Brane, let me review the docs and get back to you.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> >>> > Brane,
> >>> >
> >>> > The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
> >>> for a
> >>> > vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines
> >>> here
> >>> > that we are not aware of.
> >>>
> >>> It's all documented here:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> >>>
> >>> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> >>>
> >>> Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
> >>> non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> >>> release candidates, or any other similar package.
> >>>
> >>> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> >>> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> >>> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> >>> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> >>>
> >>> > Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick
> >>> the
> >>> > tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0
> >>> release is
> >>> > out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user
> >>> base of
> >>> > the Ignite project.
> >>>
> >>> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> >>> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
> >>> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> >>> confusing links to the web site.//
> >>>
> >>> > As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> >>> couple
> >>> > of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> >>> become
> >>> > an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just
> >>> switch one
> >>> > zip archive with another when that happens.
> >>>
> >>> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
> >>> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
> >>> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
> >>> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
> >>> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
> >>> don't want to do that myself.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
> >>> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> >>> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> >>>
> >>> -- Brane
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>.
Never mind, I found the answer that GPL with CPE is not allowed.
However, all classes under "org.apache.ignite.jdk8.backport" package have
also been released by Doug Lee to the public domain under "CC0 1.0
Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication" with the following language:
----
*Written by Doug Lea with assistance from members of JCP JSR-166*
*Expert Group and released to the public domain, as explained at*
*http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
<http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/>*
----
I think we are OK. I will update the Notice file.
D.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@gridgain.com>
wrote:
> I have a question. We actually do have some back-ported code from OpenJdk
> 8 which is licensed under GPL with CPE (Class Path Exception). Is it OK to
> have a dependency on GPL w/ CPE in the source code or do we have to remove
> it from the source code?
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Brane, let me review the docs and get back to you.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
>>> > Brane,
>>> >
>>> > The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
>>> for a
>>> > vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines
>>> here
>>> > that we are not aware of.
>>>
>>> It's all documented here:
>>>
>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>>>
>>> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
>>>
>>> Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
>>> non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
>>> release candidates, or any other similar package.
>>>
>>> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
>>> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
>>> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
>>> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
>>>
>>> > Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick
>>> the
>>> > tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0
>>> release is
>>> > out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user
>>> base of
>>> > the Ignite project.
>>>
>>> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
>>> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
>>> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
>>> confusing links to the web site.//
>>>
>>> > As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
>>> couple
>>> > of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
>>> become
>>> > an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just
>>> switch one
>>> > zip archive with another when that happens.
>>>
>>> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
>>> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
>>> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
>>> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
>>> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
>>> don't want to do that myself.
>>>
>>>
>>> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
>>> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
>>> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
>>>
>>> -- Brane
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@gridgain.com>.
I have a question. We actually do have some back-ported code from OpenJdk 8
which is licensed under GPL with CPE (Class Path Exception). Is it OK to
have a dependency on GPL w/ CPE in the source code or do we have to remove
it from the source code?
D.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:06 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Brane, let me review the docs and get back to you.
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
>> > Brane,
>> >
>> > The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
>> for a
>> > vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
>> > that we are not aware of.
>>
>> It's all documented here:
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>>
>> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
>>
>> Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
>> non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
>> release candidates, or any other similar package.
>>
>> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
>> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
>> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
>> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
>>
>> > Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick
>> the
>> > tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release
>> is
>> > out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base
>> of
>> > the Ignite project.
>>
>> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
>> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
>> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
>> confusing links to the web site.//
>>
>> > As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
>> couple
>> > of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
>> become
>> > an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch
>> one
>> > zip archive with another when that happens.
>>
>> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
>> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
>> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
>> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
>> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
>> don't want to do that myself.
>>
>>
>> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
>> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
>> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
>>
>> -- Brane
>>
>>
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>.
Brane, let me review the docs and get back to you.
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > Brane,
> >
> > The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
> for a
> > vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
> > that we are not aware of.
>
> It's all documented here:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>
> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
>
> Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
> non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> release candidates, or any other similar package.
>
> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
>
> > Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick
> the
> > tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release
> is
> > out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base
> of
> > the Ignite project.
>
> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> confusing links to the web site.//
>
> > As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a couple
> > of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> become
> > an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch
> one
> > zip archive with another when that happens.
>
> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
> don't want to do that myself.
>
>
> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
>
> -- Brane
>
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>.
Interesting read, Denis, although there's more shades in it than SDtimes can
be aware about.
Dima, I was referring to this blog-post
https://www.datastax.com/2016/10/take-a-bow-planet-cassandra
but has posted a link to this very thread instead. THanks for catching that!
Cos
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016 at 03:33PM, Denis Magda wrote:
> This might be a link that is related to the topic
> http://sdtimes.com/apache-foundation-board-reining-datastax/ <http://sdtimes.com/apache-foundation-board-reining-datastax/>
>
> Good case so far.
>
> \u2014
> Denis
>
> > On Nov 4, 2016, at 9:00 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Cos, this link is wrong.
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:14 AM, Konstantin I Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> This blog post from DataStax [1] has reminded me of the conversation we
> >> had during the incubation on how to model community web-sites and how
> >> "Planet Cassandra" is doing this. Evidently, after years of the
> >> explanations and the deliberations, DataStax had finally came to their
> >> senses and stopped this violation of the Apache Cassandra trademark once
> >> and for all.
> >>
> >> [1] https://is.gd/DBrGHB
> >>
> >> Cos
> >>
> >> On 2015-03-13 03:54 (+0300), Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>> Henry, Brane,
> >>>
> >>> I completely see your points and agree. I actually finally had some time
> >>> today to look into this and will be removing the link shortly. However,
> >>> although I want to comply with ASF rules, I truly believe that having a
> >>> downloadable binary at all times increases usability and popularity of
> >> the
> >>> project.
> >>>
> >>> With that in mind, I have asked GridGain to host the download link of
> >>> Apache Ignite community edition in the mean time, granted that it will be
> >>> made clear to the users and the community that it is not an official
> >> Apache
> >>> release. This approach is also taken by Datastax with their
> >> planetcassandra
> >>> portal, http://planetcassandra.org/try-cassandra/, perhaps for similar
> >>> reasons. Once we have a legitimate release candidate, we will revert back
> >>> to the normal download process.
> >>>
> >>> I should be able to set this up within a couple of days.
> >>>
> >>> D.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
> >>>>
> >>>> The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
> >>>> ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
> >>>> Apache way.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
> >>>> as you think it is.
> >>>>
> >>>> ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
> >>>> documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
> >>>>
> >>>> What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
> >>>> how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
> >>>> When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
> >>>> list or even go to incubator general@ list.
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
> >>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko \u010cibej <br...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> >>>>>> Brane,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was
> >> submitted
> >>>> for a
> >>>>>> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines
> >> here
> >>>>>> that we are not aware of.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's all documented here:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Do not include any links on the project website that might
> >> encourage
> >>>>> non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> >>>>> release candidates, or any other similar package.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> >>>>> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> >>>>> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> >>>>> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to
> >> kick
> >>>> the
> >>>>>> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0
> >> release
> >>>> is
> >>>>>> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user
> >> base
> >>>> of
> >>>>>> the Ignite project.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> >>>>> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow)
> >> copy.
> >>>>> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> >>>>> confusing links to the web site.//
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> >>>> couple
> >>>>>> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> >>>> become
> >>>>>> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just
> >> switch
> >>>> one
> >>>>>> zip archive with another when that happens.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is
> >> driven
> >>>>> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least
> >> a
> >>>>> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the
> >> same
> >>>>> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users
> >> and
> >>>>> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I
> >> really
> >>>>> don't want to do that myself.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my
> >> comments on
> >>>>> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> >>>>> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- Brane
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Denis Magda <dm...@gridgain.com>.
This might be a link that is related to the topic
http://sdtimes.com/apache-foundation-board-reining-datastax/ <http://sdtimes.com/apache-foundation-board-reining-datastax/>
Good case so far.
—
Denis
> On Nov 4, 2016, at 9:00 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Cos, this link is wrong.
>
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:14 AM, Konstantin I Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> This blog post from DataStax [1] has reminded me of the conversation we
>> had during the incubation on how to model community web-sites and how
>> "Planet Cassandra" is doing this. Evidently, after years of the
>> explanations and the deliberations, DataStax had finally came to their
>> senses and stopped this violation of the Apache Cassandra trademark once
>> and for all.
>>
>> [1] https://is.gd/DBrGHB
>>
>> Cos
>>
>> On 2015-03-13 03:54 (+0300), Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>> Henry, Brane,
>>>
>>> I completely see your points and agree. I actually finally had some time
>>> today to look into this and will be removing the link shortly. However,
>>> although I want to comply with ASF rules, I truly believe that having a
>>> downloadable binary at all times increases usability and popularity of
>> the
>>> project.
>>>
>>> With that in mind, I have asked GridGain to host the download link of
>>> Apache Ignite community edition in the mean time, granted that it will be
>>> made clear to the users and the community that it is not an official
>> Apache
>>> release. This approach is also taken by Datastax with their
>> planetcassandra
>>> portal, http://planetcassandra.org/try-cassandra/, perhaps for similar
>>> reasons. Once we have a legitimate release candidate, we will revert back
>>> to the normal download process.
>>>
>>> I should be able to set this up within a couple of days.
>>>
>>> D.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
>>>>
>>>> The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
>>>> ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
>>>> Apache way.
>>>>
>>>> I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
>>>> as you think it is.
>>>>
>>>> ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
>>>> documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
>>>>
>>>> What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
>>>> how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
>>>> When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
>>>> list or even go to incubator general@ list.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
>>>>>> Brane,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was
>> submitted
>>>> for a
>>>>>> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines
>> here
>>>>>> that we are not aware of.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's all documented here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
>>>>>
>>>>> Do not include any links on the project website that might
>> encourage
>>>>> non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
>>>>> release candidates, or any other similar package.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
>>>>> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
>>>>> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
>>>>> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to
>> kick
>>>> the
>>>>>> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0
>> release
>>>> is
>>>>>> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user
>> base
>>>> of
>>>>>> the Ignite project.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
>>>>> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow)
>> copy.
>>>>> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
>>>>> confusing links to the web site.//
>>>>>
>>>>>> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
>>>> couple
>>>>>> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
>>>> become
>>>>>> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just
>> switch
>>>> one
>>>>>> zip archive with another when that happens.
>>>>>
>>>>> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is
>> driven
>>>>> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least
>> a
>>>>> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the
>> same
>>>>> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users
>> and
>>>>> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I
>> really
>>>>> don't want to do that myself.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my
>> comments on
>>>>> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
>>>>> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Brane
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>.
Cos, this link is wrong.
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 1:14 AM, Konstantin I Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
> This blog post from DataStax [1] has reminded me of the conversation we
> had during the incubation on how to model community web-sites and how
> "Planet Cassandra" is doing this. Evidently, after years of the
> explanations and the deliberations, DataStax had finally came to their
> senses and stopped this violation of the Apache Cassandra trademark once
> and for all.
>
> [1] https://is.gd/DBrGHB
>
> Cos
>
> On 2015-03-13 03:54 (+0300), Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > Henry, Brane,
> >
> > I completely see your points and agree. I actually finally had some time
> > today to look into this and will be removing the link shortly. However,
> > although I want to comply with ASF rules, I truly believe that having a
> > downloadable binary at all times increases usability and popularity of
> the
> > project.
> >
> > With that in mind, I have asked GridGain to host the download link of
> > Apache Ignite community edition in the mean time, granted that it will be
> > made clear to the users and the community that it is not an official
> Apache
> > release. This approach is also taken by Datastax with their
> planetcassandra
> > portal, http://planetcassandra.org/try-cassandra/, perhaps for similar
> > reasons. Once we have a legitimate release candidate, we will revert back
> > to the normal download process.
> >
> > I should be able to set this up within a couple of days.
> >
> > D.
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
> > >
> > > The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
> > > ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
> > > Apache way.
> > >
> > > I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
> > > as you think it is.
> > >
> > > ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
> > > documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
> > >
> > > What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
> > > how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
> > > When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
> > > list or even go to incubator general@ list.
> > >
> > > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
> > > [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > > >> Brane,
> > > >>
> > > >> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was
> submitted
> > > for a
> > > >> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines
> here
> > > >> that we are not aware of.
> > > >
> > > > It's all documented here:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> > > >
> > > > Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> > > >
> > > > Do not include any links on the project website that might
> encourage
> > > > non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> > > > release candidates, or any other similar package.
> > > >
> > > > It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> > > > publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> > > > Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> > > > have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> > > >
> > > >> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to
> kick
> > > the
> > > >> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0
> release
> > > is
> > > >> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user
> base
> > > of
> > > >> the Ignite project.
> > > >
> > > > Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> > > > repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow)
> copy.
> > > > It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> > > > confusing links to the web site.//
> > > >
> > > >> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> > > couple
> > > >> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> > > become
> > > >> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just
> switch
> > > one
> > > >> zip archive with another when that happens.
> > > >
> > > > You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is
> driven
> > > > by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least
> a
> > > > week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the
> same
> > > > again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users
> and
> > > > violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I
> really
> > > > don't want to do that myself.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my
> comments on
> > > > RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> > > > haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> > > >
> > > > -- Brane
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Konstantin I Boudnik <co...@apache.org>.
This blog post from DataStax [1] has reminded me of the conversation we had during the incubation on how to model community web-sites and how "Planet Cassandra" is doing this. Evidently, after years of the explanations and the deliberations, DataStax had finally came to their senses and stopped this violation of the Apache Cassandra trademark once and for all.
[1] https://is.gd/DBrGHB
Cos
On 2015-03-13 03:54 (+0300), Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org> wrote:
> Henry, Brane,
>
> I completely see your points and agree. I actually finally had some time
> today to look into this and will be removing the link shortly. However,
> although I want to comply with ASF rules, I truly believe that having a
> downloadable binary at all times increases usability and popularity of the
> project.
>
> With that in mind, I have asked GridGain to host the download link of
> Apache Ignite community edition in the mean time, granted that it will be
> made clear to the users and the community that it is not an official Apache
> release. This approach is also taken by Datastax with their planetcassandra
> portal, http://planetcassandra.org/try-cassandra/, perhaps for similar
> reasons. Once we have a legitimate release candidate, we will revert back
> to the normal download process.
>
> I should be able to set this up within a couple of days.
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
> >
> > The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
> > ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
> > Apache way.
> >
> > I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
> > as you think it is.
> >
> > ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
> > documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
> >
> > What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
> > how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
> > When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
> > list or even go to incubator general@ list.
> >
> > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
> > [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko \u010cibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > >> Brane,
> > >>
> > >> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
> > for a
> > >> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
> > >> that we are not aware of.
> > >
> > > It's all documented here:
> > >
> > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> > >
> > > Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> > >
> > > Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
> > > non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> > > release candidates, or any other similar package.
> > >
> > > It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> > > publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> > > Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> > > have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> > >
> > >> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick
> > the
> > >> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release
> > is
> > >> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base
> > of
> > >> the Ignite project.
> > >
> > > Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> > > repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
> > > It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> > > confusing links to the web site.//
> > >
> > >> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> > couple
> > >> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> > become
> > >> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch
> > one
> > >> zip archive with another when that happens.
> > >
> > > You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
> > > by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
> > > week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
> > > again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
> > > violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
> > > don't want to do that myself.
> > >
> > >
> > > While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
> > > RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> > > haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> > >
> > > -- Brane
> > >
> >
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 07:20PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I think it should do in the meanwhile. Still would be great to have a
> > simple
> > DEVNOTES where ppl can learn how to build binaries from git. Then all you'd
> > need to do is to give them a tag for an RC or else.
> >
>
> We have it in RC3.
That'd make sense to have on the web as well - so new contributors/users can
easily figure out what to do. But I presume it is coming.
> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 05:54PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > > Henry, Brane,
> > >
> > > I completely see your points and agree. I actually finally had some time
> > > today to look into this and will be removing the link shortly. However,
> > > although I want to comply with ASF rules, I truly believe that having a
> > > downloadable binary at all times increases usability and popularity of
> > the
> > > project.
> > >
> > > With that in mind, I have asked GridGain to host the download link of
> > > Apache Ignite community edition in the mean time, granted that it will be
> > > made clear to the users and the community that it is not an official
> > Apache
> > > release. This approach is also taken by Datastax with their
> > planetcassandra
> > > portal, http://planetcassandra.org/try-cassandra/, perhaps for similar
> > > reasons. Once we have a legitimate release candidate, we will revert back
> > > to the normal download process.
> > >
> > > I should be able to set this up within a couple of days.
> > >
> > > D.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
> > > >
> > > > The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
> > > > ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
> > > > Apache way.
> > > >
> > > > I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
> > > > as you think it is.
> > > >
> > > > ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
> > > > documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
> > > >
> > > > What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
> > > > how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
> > > > When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
> > > > list or even go to incubator general@ list.
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
> > > > [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > > On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > > > >> Brane,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was
> > submitted
> > > > for a
> > > > >> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines
> > here
> > > > >> that we are not aware of.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's all documented here:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> > > > >
> > > > > Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> > > > >
> > > > > Do not include any links on the project website that might
> > encourage
> > > > > non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> > > > > release candidates, or any other similar package.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> > > > > publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> > > > > Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> > > > > have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> > > > >
> > > > >> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to
> > kick
> > > > the
> > > > >> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0
> > release
> > > > is
> > > > >> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user
> > base
> > > > of
> > > > >> the Ignite project.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> > > > > repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow)
> > copy.
> > > > > It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> > > > > confusing links to the web site.//
> > > > >
> > > > >> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> > > > couple
> > > > >> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> > > > become
> > > > >> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just
> > switch
> > > > one
> > > > >> zip archive with another when that happens.
> > > > >
> > > > > You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is
> > driven
> > > > > by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least
> > a
> > > > > week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the
> > same
> > > > > again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users
> > and
> > > > > violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I
> > really
> > > > > don't want to do that myself.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my
> > comments on
> > > > > RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> > > > > haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Brane
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org> wrote:
> I think it should do in the meanwhile. Still would be great to have a
> simple
> DEVNOTES where ppl can learn how to build binaries from git. Then all you'd
> need to do is to give them a tag for an RC or else.
>
We have it in RC3.
>
> Cos
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 05:54PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > Henry, Brane,
> >
> > I completely see your points and agree. I actually finally had some time
> > today to look into this and will be removing the link shortly. However,
> > although I want to comply with ASF rules, I truly believe that having a
> > downloadable binary at all times increases usability and popularity of
> the
> > project.
> >
> > With that in mind, I have asked GridGain to host the download link of
> > Apache Ignite community edition in the mean time, granted that it will be
> > made clear to the users and the community that it is not an official
> Apache
> > release. This approach is also taken by Datastax with their
> planetcassandra
> > portal, http://planetcassandra.org/try-cassandra/, perhaps for similar
> > reasons. Once we have a legitimate release candidate, we will revert back
> > to the normal download process.
> >
> > I should be able to set this up within a couple of days.
> >
> > D.
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
> > >
> > > The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
> > > ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
> > > Apache way.
> > >
> > > I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
> > > as you think it is.
> > >
> > > ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
> > > documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
> > >
> > > What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
> > > how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
> > > When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
> > > list or even go to incubator general@ list.
> > >
> > > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
> > > [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > > >> Brane,
> > > >>
> > > >> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was
> submitted
> > > for a
> > > >> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines
> here
> > > >> that we are not aware of.
> > > >
> > > > It's all documented here:
> > > >
> > > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> > > >
> > > > Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> > > >
> > > > Do not include any links on the project website that might
> encourage
> > > > non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> > > > release candidates, or any other similar package.
> > > >
> > > > It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> > > > publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> > > > Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> > > > have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> > > >
> > > >> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to
> kick
> > > the
> > > >> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0
> release
> > > is
> > > >> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user
> base
> > > of
> > > >> the Ignite project.
> > > >
> > > > Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> > > > repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow)
> copy.
> > > > It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> > > > confusing links to the web site.//
> > > >
> > > >> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> > > couple
> > > >> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> > > become
> > > >> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just
> switch
> > > one
> > > >> zip archive with another when that happens.
> > > >
> > > > You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is
> driven
> > > > by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least
> a
> > > > week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the
> same
> > > > again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users
> and
> > > > violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I
> really
> > > > don't want to do that myself.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my
> comments on
> > > > RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> > > > haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> > > >
> > > > -- Brane
> > > >
> > >
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Konstantin Boudnik <co...@apache.org>.
I think it should do in the meanwhile. Still would be great to have a simple
DEVNOTES where ppl can learn how to build binaries from git. Then all you'd
need to do is to give them a tag for an RC or else.
Cos
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 05:54PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> Henry, Brane,
>
> I completely see your points and agree. I actually finally had some time
> today to look into this and will be removing the link shortly. However,
> although I want to comply with ASF rules, I truly believe that having a
> downloadable binary at all times increases usability and popularity of the
> project.
>
> With that in mind, I have asked GridGain to host the download link of
> Apache Ignite community edition in the mean time, granted that it will be
> made clear to the users and the community that it is not an official Apache
> release. This approach is also taken by Datastax with their planetcassandra
> portal, http://planetcassandra.org/try-cassandra/, perhaps for similar
> reasons. Once we have a legitimate release candidate, we will revert back
> to the normal download process.
>
> I should be able to set this up within a couple of days.
>
> D.
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
> >
> > The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
> > ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
> > Apache way.
> >
> > I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
> > as you think it is.
> >
> > ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
> > documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
> >
> > What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
> > how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
> > When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
> > list or even go to incubator general@ list.
> >
> > [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
> > [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> > >> Brane,
> > >>
> > >> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
> > for a
> > >> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
> > >> that we are not aware of.
> > >
> > > It's all documented here:
> > >
> > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> > >
> > > Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> > >
> > > Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
> > > non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> > > release candidates, or any other similar package.
> > >
> > > It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> > > publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> > > Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> > > have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> > >
> > >> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick
> > the
> > >> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release
> > is
> > >> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base
> > of
> > >> the Ignite project.
> > >
> > > Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> > > repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
> > > It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> > > confusing links to the web site.//
> > >
> > >> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> > couple
> > >> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> > become
> > >> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch
> > one
> > >> zip archive with another when that happens.
> > >
> > > You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
> > > by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
> > > week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
> > > again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
> > > violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
> > > don't want to do that myself.
> > >
> > >
> > > While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
> > > RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> > > haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> > >
> > > -- Brane
> > >
> >
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>.
Henry, Brane,
I completely see your points and agree. I actually finally had some time
today to look into this and will be removing the link shortly. However,
although I want to comply with ASF rules, I truly believe that having a
downloadable binary at all times increases usability and popularity of the
project.
With that in mind, I have asked GridGain to host the download link of
Apache Ignite community edition in the mean time, granted that it will be
made clear to the users and the community that it is not an official Apache
release. This approach is also taken by Datastax with their planetcassandra
portal, http://planetcassandra.org/try-cassandra/, perhaps for similar
reasons. Once we have a legitimate release candidate, we will revert back
to the normal download process.
I should be able to set this up within a couple of days.
D.
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
>
> The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
> ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
> Apache way.
>
> I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
> as you think it is.
>
> ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
> documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
>
> What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
> how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
> When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
> list or even go to incubator general@ list.
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> >> Brane,
> >>
> >> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted
> for a
> >> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
> >> that we are not aware of.
> >
> > It's all documented here:
> >
> > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
> >
> > Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
> >
> > Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
> > non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> > release candidates, or any other similar package.
> >
> > It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> > publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> > Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> > have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> >
> >> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick
> the
> >> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release
> is
> >> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base
> of
> >> the Ignite project.
> >
> > Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> > repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
> > It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> > confusing links to the web site.//
> >
> >> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a
> couple
> >> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely
> become
> >> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch
> one
> >> zip archive with another when that happens.
> >
> > You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
> > by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
> > week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
> > again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
> > violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
> > don't want to do that myself.
> >
> >
> > While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
> > RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> > haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
> >
> > -- Brane
> >
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Henry Saputra <he...@gmail.com>.
I agree. Please do remove the RC1 download links.
The main reasons of any project need to be in incubator when joining
ASF is to make sure that the community know how to develop in the
Apache way.
I am hoping that you do not guess or believe that things should work
as you think it is.
ALL initial committers please read and understand how to release
documentation [1] and document about being ASF committer [2]
What we are expecting from the new PPMCs are please try to understand
how ASF work and do not just do things based what you already knew.
When in doubt you can look at Apache websites or ask mentors in dev@
list or even go to incubator general@ list.
[1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release-publishing.html
[2] http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
>> Brane,
>>
>> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted for a
>> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
>> that we are not aware of.
>
> It's all documented here:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
>
> Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
>
> Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
> non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
> release candidates, or any other similar package.
>
> It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
> publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
> Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
> have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
>
>> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick the
>> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release is
>> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base of
>> the Ignite project.
>
> Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
> repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
> It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
> confusing links to the web site.//
>
>> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a couple
>> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely become
>> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch one
>> zip archive with another when that happens.
>
> You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
> by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
> week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
> again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
> violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
> don't want to do that myself.
>
>
> While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
> RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
> haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
>
> -- Brane
>
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 10.03.2015 22:17, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> Brane,
>
> The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted for a
> vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
> that we are not aware of.
It's all documented here:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html
Specifically, this is written *in bold* on that page:
Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots,
release candidates, or any other similar package.
It is fine to call a specific package a "release candidate" and even
publish is as an ASF release under that name, but in the case of
Ignite's RC1 and RC2, these are /not/ official releases because they
have not been approved as such by the PPMC and IPMC.
> Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick the
> tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release is
> out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base of
> the Ignite project.
Then tell people how to fetch a tag or specific commit from the git
repository, or simply how to clone a read-only (possibly shallow) copy.
It definitely doesn't serve the Ignite community or user base to post
confusing links to the web site.//
> As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a couple
> of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely become
> an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch one
> zip archive with another when that happens.
You must realize that our release policy is not arbitrary and is driven
by legal requirements. Even if RC3 is perfect, it will take at least a
week to approve (vote on dev@ must run at least 72 hours, and the same
again for the IPMC vote), so that's an extra week of confusing users and
violating ASF policies. Please remove the download link because I really
don't want to do that myself.
While we're on the topic of RC3, I've been trying to send my comments on
RC2 twice to this list in the last couple days, but apparently they
haven't come through ... I'll try again, hope for the best.
-- Brane
Re: Downloads on the web site
Posted by Dmitriy Setrakyan <ds...@apache.org>.
Brane,
The RC1 was a legitimate Ignite release candidate as it was submitted for a
vote. Please let us know if there are certain documented guidelines here
that we are not aware of.
Moreover, this RC1 zip archive provides users with the ability to kick the
tires with Apache Ignite ahead of time, before the official 1.0 release is
out. I am not sure how removing it serves either community or user base of
the Ignite project.
As a side note, we already have addressed all RC2 issues and are a couple
of days away from sending out RC3 for a vote, which will most likely become
an official Apache Ignite 1.0 release. It will be easier to just switch one
zip archive with another when that happens.
D.
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:52 AM, Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 10.03.2015 09:44, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > Can you guys please remove the download link to RC1 from the Ignite web
> > site. It's never been released and the link there is extremely confusing
> > to potential users, who may think that it is an ASF release.
>
> Furthermore, download links should never point at the ASF servers but at
> the closest mirror. And mirrors are only populated from released versions.
>
> -- Brane
>
>