On Sep 20, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> On Sep 20, 2010, at 2:46 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>> On Sep 20, 2010, at 2:21 PM, Yonik Seeley wrote: >>>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>> While, yes, I will agree it is not official, it is the de facto standard >>>> by which we have done releases and RM's have always worked to it. >>> >>> I'd wager that there has never been a single lucene or solr release >>> that followed every single instruction to the T. Which means that >>> people need to use their heads and understand that "many of the items >>> may be optional, or may be modified as necessary." >>> >>> You can't point at the guide as a *reason* to do something, only *how* >>> to do something. If I knew someone would point to it and say "you >>> must do XYZ because it's on that HOWTO" then I would have vetoed most >>> changes to that page. >> >> As I have said for the 3rd time, of course I get that people need to be >> flexible and there has always been an implied "use your head". But, as I >> said, given you wrote it on the heels of the discussion around Maven and >> that you think we shouldn't publish Maven artifacts, I think it is clear you >> intend it to imply that the RM gets to chose what artifacts are released. >> Is that not the case? > > IMO, the RM has no more power than any other PMC member. But when > there are a lot of optional things on the list...
Perhaps you should itemize all the items that are optional and then we can mark them as such. Is uploading the artifacts (maven or not) optional? Perhaps next time I do a release I'll just skip that one. Is updating the website? OK, so I'll give you the FreshMeat and the ServerSide posts, etc. > I guess the > volunteers doing the work get to decide what parts they want to do. I'd agree that there are some things that should be optional, especially the post release items. Some things, however, are not. Perhaps we should just list out what we view as being required and which ones are not. > The PMC as a whole gets to decide to release artifacts or not. Of course. I don't see how that is relevant to the question I asked. > > I am also re-asserting (as I have asserted in the past) that the Maven > artifacts are *optional*. > We've discussed maven not being mandatory before: > http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/bd618c89a4d458dc/lucene_2_9_again > http://search.lucidimagination.com/search/document/3b98fa9ec3073936 > You asserting in previous threads that Maven is optional does not make it optional. AFAICT, we have done them for as long as we have said we would do them. I'm fine with us as a community dropping Maven releases if that is what is decided. I am absolutely not fine with the RM deciding to drop them based on what he feels like doing as part of that release. If you don't have time to do the required items, then you shouldn't be an RM. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
