On Dec 4, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile <arie...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 02:13:49PM -0500, Rob Weir wrote: >>>>>> Any opinions, concerns or feedback? Follow up discussion should take >>>>>> place on the dev list only (the list where decisions are made). >>>>> >>>>> It may be a good idea to build all languages, or at least those with 80% >>>>> of the UI translated, but release only those with 100%; we could leave >>>>> the rest in people.apache.org as unofficial builds (at least langpacks), >>>>> and point people to them instead of you-know-what http://s.apache.org/yY >>>> >>>> We can't do that. We either release or we don't release a language. >>>> If we're not releasing it then we should not be pointing users to it >>>> on people.apache.org. This is an issue both from Apache release >>>> policy and Infra policy (bandwidth issues). >>> >>> Change people.apache.org for apache-extras or any other place. The idea >>> is having all language packs built, not advertising them on our website >>> (that said, note that the dev. snapshots hosted on people.apache.org are >>> advertised on the main download page ;) ). And the goal is to point them >>> to user when they ask, or list them on the porting page, or using them >>> for ongoing translation efforts, etc. >> >> >> If we want something to be downloaded and used by the public then we >> should release it, period. We should not be looking for clever ways >> to avoid the important release steps of verifying IP, producing a >> source package and voting on it. > > It seems you are mixing things, as I only proposed to build all language > packages, while following the same release criteria as before (release > only languages with 100% UI and a localization team backing it). Where > do you see a clever way to avoid official procedures in this? > When you suggested that we point users to these un-released binaries. > In the end, it's just the same as I've done with the linux glib-2.5 > build, which is advertised in the portings page, and stored at > people.apache.org... I haven't heard any complaints about this, so far > only some people thankful > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119385#c13 > Perhaps we should start looking at such pseudo releases more carefully? > If I have the time, and the will to do so with the language packs, there > is nothing that prevents me for doing so. > >> This is what it means to be an Apache project. > > > Regards > -- > Ariel Constenla-Haile > La Plata, Argentina
