Thanks Dave! Yeah. I will get a list of content in packages.
For the docker image, I think it should be ok. Let me try to publish it to Apache docker hub and see if there is anything missing. On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 2:14 PM Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > >
