Source distributions (and more importantly, their .asc and .sha files) must be 
on ASF hardware. If .tar.gz files under github.com/apache/arrow is causing 
confusion, let’s remove them.

> On Feb 11, 2026, at 5:08 PM, David Li <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> The GitHub-generated source tarball is not canonical and there is no 
> guarantee of its stability from GitHub, as Bryce has pointed out. 
> Unfortunately, GitHub does not provide a way to disable this to avoid 
> confusion. We upload our own source tarball (as an artifact, so it remains 
> stable) along with the GPG signature and SHA512 hash to the release. And I 
> will embed the hash into the email as well.
> 
> To wit:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/releases/download/apache-arrow-adbc-21/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz
> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/releases/download/apache-arrow-adbc-21/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz.asc
> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/releases/download/apache-arrow-adbc-21/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz.sha512
> 
> lidavidm@Canon ~/Downloads> sha512sum apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz
> ea2a7e066886054f541daaf3294d0fd63372ef1e4a077cf84483dffbed183cc97363665a2ef7bd3ede8378be63d102d2770ca26fca16e9a04adb53eb524012a8
>   apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz
> lidavidm@Canon ~/Downloads> cat apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz.sha512
> ea2a7e066886054f541daaf3294d0fd63372ef1e4a077cf84483dffbed183cc97363665a2ef7bd3ede8378be63d102d2770ca26fca16e9a04adb53eb524012a8
>   apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz
> lidavidm@Canon ~/Downloads> gpg --verify apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz.asc
> gpg: assuming signed data in 'apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz'
> gpg: Signature made Mon Nov  3 16:09:42 2025 JST
> gpg:                using RSA key BE7EF45DBAD38E4EECED390E9CBA4EF977CA20B8
> gpg: Good signature from "David Li (CODE SIGNING KEY) <[email protected]>" 
> [ultimate]
> 
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2026, at 06:27, Julian Hyde wrote:
>> For what it's worth, the sha512 (retrieved from the svn log of 
>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/arrow/) is as follows. 
>> 
>> Index: apache-arrow-adbc-21/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz.sha512
>> ===================================================================
>> --- apache-arrow-adbc-21/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz.sha512     
>> (nonexistent)
>> +++ apache-arrow-adbc-21/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz.sha512     
>> (revision 80550)
>> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
>> +ea2a7e066886054f541daaf3294d0fd63372ef1e4a077cf84483dffbed183cc97363665a2ef7bd3ede8378be63d102d2770ca26fca16e9a04adb53eb524012a8
>>  
>> apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 11, 2026, at 11:36 AM, Bryce Mecum <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> New thread: https://lists.apache.org/thread/o2mpsf5okhzfz2k4mbg5d4s9ror69587
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 11:26 AM Bryce Mecum <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Julian, I'm going to start a new thread to discuss the RC
>>>> provenance question.
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2026 at 11:22 AM Julian Hyde <[email protected]> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sorry to persist. But I still don’t have a satisfactory answer to this 
>>>>> one:
>>>>> 
>>>>> How can you be sure that the SHA of the RC that four people voted on?
>>>>> 
>>>>> (In Calcite, every RC is still in the dist/dev tree. E.g. 
>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/calcite/apache-calcite-1.21.0-rc0/.
>>>>>  But I can’t find a similar archive for Arrow.)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Julian
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 9, 2026, at 1:43 PM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I’ve added some comments to that issue, so let’s continue there.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If other Arrow components are anything like ADBC, we (the Arrow PMC) 
>>>>>> have some release provenance issues to address. These include integrity 
>>>>>> of release votes, downloads pages providing links to historic releases 
>>>>>> and their hashes, and release announcements that include a permanent 
>>>>>> link to artifacts.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (If I am overreacting, I apologize. My investigations are hampered by 
>>>>>> the fact that https://archive.apache.org/dist/arrow/ is timing out 
>>>>>> currently.)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Feb 9, 2026, at 12:01 PM, Bryce Mecum <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://arrow.apache.org/adbc/current/driver/installation.html which
>>>>>>> can be traversed to from https://arrow.apache.org. I created [1] to
>>>>>>> address the information gaps on that page.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/issues/3946
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 11:32 AM Julian Hyde <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> What is the downloads page for Arrow ADBC? The Arrow downloads page 
>>>>>>>> only includes Arrow releases, so it looks as if ADBC isn’t complying 
>>>>>>>> with the policy for downloads pages: 
>>>>>>>> https://infra.apache.org/release-download-pages.html#download-page
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Feb 9, 2026, at 11:25 AM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Re "checksums are linked in the vote thread”. Are any of those 
>>>>>>>>> checksums still available? The linked by the vote, 
>>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/arrow/apache-arrow-adbc-21-rc0 
>>>>>>>>> appears to be broken.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> To put it another way. Can you prove that the artifact you voted on 
>>>>>>>>> had hash 
>>>>>>>>> 74d9dedd15bce71bfbc5bce00ad1aa91be84623010e2a01e6846343a7acc93e36fb263a08cc8437a9467bf63a2c7aca4b14d413325d5afb96b590408d918b27e.
>>>>>>>>>  If not, we have a provenance problem.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 9, 2026, at 11:02 AM, Bryce Mecum <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Sorry for any confusion caused, Julian. I didn't mean to imply the
>>>>>>>>>> GitHub URL was the definitive location for the asset and I only 
>>>>>>>>>> linked
>>>>>>>>>> it because I know it's the same artifact as what's uploaded to ASF 
>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>> it was near at hand. I otherwise would've linked to [1].
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Re: the potential policy violations, I can put up a PR to add the
>>>>>>>>>> latest closer.lua URL to [2] which may address your first point and,
>>>>>>>>>> for the second point, the checksums are linked in the vote thread so
>>>>>>>>>> everything looks fine there.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> [1] 
>>>>>>>>>> https://archive.apache.org/dist/arrow/apache-arrow-adbc-21/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz
>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://arrow.apache.org/adbc/current/driver/installation.html
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 10:14 AM Julian Hyde <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Where is the definitive location for the ADBC 21 source tarball? It 
>>>>>>>>>>> should be on ASF infrastructure, not GitHub.com 
>>>>>>>>>>> <http://github.com/>.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> We may have a couple of policy violations here. The release 
>>>>>>>>>>> announcement for ADBC 21 [1] does not link to any permanent 
>>>>>>>>>>> location for downloads. And the SHA512 for the tarball does not 
>>>>>>>>>>> appear anywhere in the vote thread for the release [2].
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> We should not be trying to construct the provenance of a release 
>>>>>>>>>>> using circumstantial evidence such as "On *Dec 14, 2025 at 7:46 AM 
>>>>>>>>>>> EST*, the SHA512 checksum for that file was …"
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Julian
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/dpxqpory5pmd119j85ks7cq9prword9p
>>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/mx2bwkbx51hy8robpnqksw93hrqzhtp9
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 9, 2026, at 9:17 AM, Bryce Mecum <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey Rusty,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the URL you shared is the source archive for the git tag 
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> not the release artifact. If I remember correctly, GitHub has had
>>>>>>>>>>>> issues with checksum stability with those URLs in the past and, 
>>>>>>>>>>>> while
>>>>>>>>>>>> the situation has gotten better, we recommend only using the 
>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>> artifacts anyway [1]. If [1] isn't hash stable, let us know.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] 
>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/releases/download/apache-arrow-adbc-21/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 7:30 AM Rusty Conover <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Arrow Friends,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apologies in advance if this is the wrong mailing list or if I’m 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> missing something obvious — but I’ve run into something odd with 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the `apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz` release artifact.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’ve been building ADBC via vcpkg as part of my `adbc_scanner` 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> DuckDB extension, using the following source archive:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/arrow-adbc/archive/apache-arrow-adbc-21.tar.gz
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On *Dec 14, 2025 at 7:46 AM EST*, the SHA512 checksum for that 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> file was:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> `74d9dedd15bce71bfbc5bce00ad1aa91be84623010e2a01e6846343a7acc93e36fb263a08cc8437a9467bf63a2c7aca4b14d413325d5afb96b590408d918b27e
>>>>>>>>>>>>> `
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know this definitively because that hash is recorded in my 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> vcpkg overlay file, and CI completed successfully at the time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since then, however, the SHA512 checksum for the same URL now 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolves to:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> `2c15c67d12b6b5ceafdd284038bff71136bac24b9aff1791ed0657e0f0a56ca713e641f9d1032918179af6c387762491c022f43d32995f94a749a60c7b91f20b
>>>>>>>>>>>>> `
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is currently causing reproducible CI failures on the `v1.4` 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch of my extension, which you can see starting here:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/Query-farm/adbc_scanner/actions?page=5
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Did I miss an announcement, or was the release artifact rebuilt 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or replaced after the initial publication?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks in advance for any clarification, and sorry again if this 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is my fault.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rusty
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://query.farm
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 

Reply via email to