Thanks Dave. This is super helpful.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 8:13 PM Dave Fisher <wave4d...@comcast.net> wrote: > Infra had three concerns which roughly are: > > (1) The aggregate size of the binary release. There are rules about > releases larger than 1GB which put pressure on the mirror providers. > Warning to Infra is required prior to putting these packages on Apache > Distribution servers. > > (2) Apache binary releases are termed unofficial conveniences provided by > the community which follow normal Apache Release Policy. The question is > what packaging is helpful for Heron’s users? The tar.gz question is the > correct one. > > (3) Since the binary packages are large have we checked that all the > included licenses are correct? > > Let’s work out (2) and (3) before rechecking about (1) > > Regards, > Dave > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Jan 27, 2020, at 6:48 PM, Josh Fischer <j...@joshfischer.io> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Part of the Heron binary release is more than just the client artifacts > > that would be loaded into Maven Central. For example if you look at an > old > > release prior to Heron being donated to Apache we have install scripts > and > > tarred binaries for use in different operating systems. You can view them > > here -> https://github.com/apache/incubator-heron/releases/tag/0.17.8. > > Where would be go about hosting these install scripts and tar.gz files? > I > > think each of them are ~500MB in size today. My initial thoughts (for > > simplicity) are that we could ignore the tar.gz files containing binaries > > and just offer install scripts and one supported docker image. If > binaries > > are needed for manual installation I think people could just compile > parts > > of Heron at that point. I'll look into the licensing/policy issues on > the > > Heron docker container in the meantime. > > > > - Josh > > > >> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 7:24 PM Dave Fisher <wave4d...@comcast.net> > wrote: > >> > >> The ASF as a whole is rather conservative in the sense of being slow to > >> change. > >> > >> Maven Central for JAR packaging has been around for over a decade AND is > >> supported by Apache projects. > >> > >> Docker is comparatively new and there is less policy around it. There is > >> some, but perhaps not well documented. > >> > >> I think we should evaluate the docker file and see what licensing/policy > >> questions there are. We can then ask the VP, Legal Affairs on > >> legal-disc...@apache.org > >> > >> Regards, > >> Dave > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >>>> On Jan 17, 2020, at 2:41 PM, Josh Fischer <j...@joshfischer.io> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Gotcha. I understand the difference in the two now, but I'm not sure > >> why > >>> one would be allowed over the other. At the end of the day they are > both > >>> compiled binaries released under the Apache foundation. I'll take some > >>> time to read through apache docs to see if I can get a better > >> understanding > >>> of the differences in the two. > >>> > >>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 4:28 PM Ning Wang <wangnin...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> That's true. Maven artifacts are binaries too. My bad. > >>>> > >>>> The "binary" I was referring to are the executables, such as > installer, > >>>> which contains quite some executables like CLI, exeample jobs, UI, > >> tracker, > >>>> etc. The docker image is also part of my "binary". > >>>> > >>>> Basically users can just install and run their jobs without compiling > >> all > >>>> the tools from source code. Maven artifacts allow users to build their > >>>> jobs. They still need to compile all the other things in order to run > >> the > >>>> jobs. > >>>> > >>>> I hope it is more clear this time. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 1:59 PM Josh Fischer <j...@joshfischer.io> > >> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm not sure I understand how you are defining the differences > between > >>>> the > >>>>> terms "maven artifacts" and "binary releases". Wouldn't a maven > >>>> artifact ( > >>>>> java jar ) be considered a binary release as well? Am I missing > >>>> something? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 1:02 AM Ning Wang <wangnin...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> I think we can not make an official binary release yet before clear > >> all > >>>>>> license issues. Therefore, 0.20.0.2 can have maven artifacts but it > >>>> can't > >>>>>> have binary release. :( > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That's just my understanding of Apache requirements. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 2:24 PM Josh Fischer <j...@joshfischer.io> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I'd like to start the process to vote for the 0.20.2-incubating > >>>> binary > >>>>>>> release. Before we start I remember there were concerns about the > >>>> size > >>>>>> of > >>>>>>> the Heron binary and where it would be hosted on Apache Infra. > Does > >>>>>> anyone > >>>>>>> have any knowledge on this potential issue? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - Josh > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
