potiuk commented on issue #10753:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/10753#issuecomment-687656608


   > For me the confusion stems from saying let's have the source of all 
available under "apache" roof is like saying we should also have the python 
dependencies under the same roof.
   > 
   > If the sources are clearly mentioned where they come from and licensing is 
not the issue, I don't think we need source to be under our roof. I don't have 
anything against it but just wanted to know what ASF policy is for that.
   
   I fully agree with that if the source is credible and if we give the users 
information on HOW to rebuild the images.
   
   For me this is enough even if one or few of the PMC members make a fork of 
the sources (or something being popular/official) and we have independent 
source of it. The jhub's pgbouncer-exporter had literally 3 forks today when I 
checked. If this person removes their repo today we might have a hard time 
finding it -especially that it was not even mentioned how the image was built 
or where the sources came from.  But those rules are for sources, not for 
binary image (which might come from anywhere and you cannot check it's 
provenience).
   
   Also I literally had hard time just FINDING where the images were from, 
which version of the base sources was used to build them and how they were 
built.  There are ate least five pgbouncer exporters I could find. Also there 
were some build problems - for example the pgbouncer exporter required `go` 
version 1.4.1+. As It was using some "go" specific feature that was introduced 
there. But it was not easy to find out and first time I tried to build it, it 
failed miserably and I had hard time finding out what I need to do. If it took 
me few hours to figure everything out (and much more for the other packages), 
this is not really something than an average user would like to spend their 
time on.  
   
   I don't think it really classifies as "possible to rebuild by the user 
having appropriate tools and platform" if it takes about a weekend by 
maintainer to figure out how to rebuild all images from the scratch :)
   
   Having a script in Apache Repo that points to the right sources, fixes the 
right versions, and making it easy to rebuild the image by the user is a must I 
believe - as I did here: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/10759
   
   It's very explicit: 
   
   * which version of the exporter was used and where the sources are from
   * which version of tools were used to build it (go version) including 
   * what worked at the time of last rebuild
   * appropriate tagging and labeling so that we can find out the versions used 
by running inspect on the image
   * tagged according to the versioning used
   * maintainer of the packaging being apache-airflow devlist address
   
   


----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


Reply via email to