You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by sebb <se...@gmail.com> on 2009/04/17 13:43:50 UTC
Is SVN considered a Release? (was: [VOTE] Release Apache Pivot 1.1
(second try))
On 17/04/2009, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 2:59 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:48 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:07 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > As far as I know, putting a file in a publicly accessible SVN
> >>> > repository is considered as distribution too.
> >>>
> >>> No, I am very positive that this is not the case. Legal dilligence is
> >>> done on the release artifacts separately from SVN issues. Unlike
> >>> release artifacts, SVN are at times incomplete, incorrect and
> >>> inaccurate. "Tags" have no legal meaning whatsoever, and should not
> >>> even be part of the discussion.
Nor do "trunk" and "branches" have any meaning, apart from by convention.
The point is that it is a lot harder to find a deleted file if there
are no references to it in any directories, be they called trunk or
branches or tags or site or whatever.
By convention, tags are not deleted or updated, so a tag may still
contain a file which no longer appears anywhere else.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> And that matches "What is a release?" in the ASF Releases FAQ (although SVN
> >> its not explicitly mentioned): http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what
Two extracts:
1) "Releases are, by definition, anything that is published beyond the
group that owns it."
2 )"All releases are in the form of the source materials needed to
make changes to the software being released."
Point (2) definitely applies to SVN.
I argue that (1) also applies to SVN, since the SVN URLs are generally
published quite prominently on the web-sites in places where the
public are expected to look.
> >
> > Uhhh, sorry, are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?
> >
>
>
> Agreeing with you, sorry if that wasn't clear.
>
>
> ...ant
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Is SVN considered a Release? (was: [VOTE] Release Apache Pivot
1.1 (second try))
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 7:43 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Two extracts:
>
> 1) "Releases are, by definition, anything that is published beyond the
> group that owns it."
>
> 2 )"All releases are in the form of the source materials needed to
> make changes to the software being released."
>
> Point (2) definitely applies to SVN.
>
> I argue that (1) also applies to SVN, since the SVN URLs are generally
> published quite prominently on the web-sites in places where the
> public are expected to look.
I'll let you battle it out with those who put the system in place and
were teaching me how it was intended to work. I will crawl back under
my rock, and let ASF be taken over by process-obsessed people. Have
Fun.
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er
I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc
I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Is SVN considered a Release? (was: [VOTE] Release Apache Pivot
1.1 (second try))
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17/04/2009, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
<snip>
>> >> And that matches "What is a release?" in the ASF Releases FAQ (although SVN
>> >> its not explicitly mentioned): http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what
>
> Two extracts:
>
> 1) "Releases are, by definition, anything that is published beyond the
> group that owns it."
>
> 2 )"All releases are in the form of the source materials needed to
> make changes to the software being released."
>
> Point (2) definitely applies to SVN.
>
> I argue that (1) also applies to SVN, since the SVN URLs are generally
> published quite prominently on the web-sites in places where the
> public are expected to look.
apologies for my poor language when we drafted that description. the
intention was to ensure that PMC understand that normal release rules
applied to any artifacts published by PMCs whether they termed them
releases or not.
official releases are - by definition - actions of the PMC. no
official release can be published without a PMC VOTE.
FWIW i would agree that a PMC could elect to create a release just by
dubbing a subversion URL at a revision. however, this would not
satisfy the infrastructure requirements that all releases are
mirrored.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org