Thank you for all the comment so far. On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
> bq. I would prefer that we have a .tar.gz release > > +1 > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > - verified signatures + checksums > > - run mvn clean install -Prelease, all artifacts build and the tests run > > smoothly (modulo some local issues I had with the installation of tox for > > the python sdk, I created a PR to fix those in case other people can have > > the same trouble). > > > > Some remarks still to fix from the release, but that I don’t consider > > blockers: > > > > 1. The section Getting Started in the main README.md needs to be updated > > with the information about the creating/activating the virtualenv. At > this > > moment just running mvn clean install won’t work without this. > mvn clean install should run without any additional steps, including the creation of a virtualenv. tox will manage this process, and it is already integrated Maven. > > > > 2. Both zip files in the current release produce a folder with the same > > name ‘apache-beam-0.6.0’. This can be messy if users unzip both files > into > > the same folder (as happened to me, the compressed files should produce a > > directory with the exact same name that the file, so > > apache-beam-0.6.0-python.zip will produce apache-beam-0.6.0-python and > the > > other its respective directory. > > > > 3. The name of the files of the release probably should be different: > > > > The source release could be just apache-beam-0.6.0.zip instead of > > apache-beam-0.6.0-source-release.zip considering that we don’t have > binary > > artifacts, or just apache-beam-0.6.0-src.zip following the convention of > > other apache projects. > > > > The python release also could be renamed from > > apache-beam-0.6.0-bin-python.zip instead of apache-beam-0.6.0-python.zip > > so > > users understand that these are executable files (but well I am not sure > > about that one considering that python is a scripting language). > Python distribution is a source distribution, adding bin to the name would be confusing. > > > > Finally I would prefer that we have a .tar.gz release as JB mentioned in > > the previous vote, and as most apache projects do. In any case if the zip > > is somehow a requirement it would be nice to have both a .zip and a > .tar.gz > > file. > > > I think we should move this to a different thread. IMO, having a single source of truth is better than having both file formats. Between both file formats I don't have a strong opinion but considering the Windows users zip might be a portable option. Thank you, Ahmet
