OK, you got me. I presume that GitHub creates this file automatically because 
there is a tag 'calcite-1.41.0’. In Calcite we have endeavored to counter the 
perception that there are releases on GitHub. Because, for the ASF, a release 
is a legal act, not merely the result of someone typing ‘git tag’ and then ‘git 
push’. I agree with you that it is hard to stay GitHub’s hand.

> On Feb 12, 2026, at 12:38 PM, Bryce Mecum <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/calcite/archive/calcite-1.41.0.tar.gz
> 
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 12:33 PM Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Really? Compare:
>> 
>> https://github.com/apache/calcite/releases (empty)
>> https://github.com/apache/arrow/releases (not empty)
>> 
>> 
>>> On Feb 12, 2026, at 12:25 PM, Bryce Mecum <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> If .tar.gz files under github.com/apache/arrow is causing confusion, let’s 
>>>> remove them.
>>> 
>>> The original confusion was caused by GitHub's user interface and API,
>>> neither of which we can change or opt out of. Since the confusion was
>>> quickly remedied in this thread, I don't think any further changes are
>>> needed.
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 11:58 AM Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 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