Hi - > On Mar 8, 2019, at 1:58 PM, Ning Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I have been trying to release Heron 0.20.1 (being distracted time by time > though) and the most recent question I am having is where to put the binary > packages. > > The binary packages are (when we were doing releases on github): > - tar.gz packages for osx, centos and ubuntu, each one includes all modules > like core, lib, tools, etc. > - .sh packages for the three platforms. which is an installer for the > modules in the tar.gz packages. > - docker image (dockerhub, not github most of the times)
Let’s discuss the components in each binary package and how big that they really are and need to be. > > Currently each package is more than 400MB. When packages of this size are released from dev to the release area it requires replication to the Apache Mirror system. When the size exceeds an aggregate of 1GB then Infra needs to manually handle things to avoid impacting the mirrors. (There are 250 projects using the mirrors.) > > I was trying to understand the Apache rules and my impression was that > these package should be on dist.apache.org like the src packages (I might > be wrong about the rules though) and it looks like Apache Storm has a > binary package in their release. Make the case for Heron without comparison to other projects. There is a place to make Apache Docker releases on docker hub. Let’s figure out this if it is a valid distribution that Heron could make. > > However it seems Apache infra has a byte limit of 500MB for each release. I > guess it means that the binary packages are not "required" to be on Apache > infra? Yes and no. Let’s discuss the packages first. > > The binary packages are convenient for users. So I think they should be > included in release. The question is where should we put them? > > So far it looks like the options are: > - ask for an exception and publish them to dist.apache.org. It seems like > Apache infra guys don't suggest this solution. > - publish only src package to dist.apache.org and publish the binary > packages on github (or is there any other suggestion?). This is convenient > for us and there is no problem so far (we have binary packages for all the > previous releases and github hasn't complained). The question about this > option is more like if this is acceptable (or ever better suggested) by > Apache? > > What do you think about the two options above and any other options we > should consider? Let’s discuss the packages. Next we will also need to discuss the website. > > Thanks. > --ning
