> -----Original Message----- > From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] > Sent: Saturday, March 26, 2016 10:38 > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Re: Releasing the Apache OpenOffice API plugin for NetBeans > > On 20/03/2016 Patricia Shanahan wrote: > > The issue is whether it is ASF distributed software, for which ASF > > trademarks can appropriately be used. I think it is and should > continue > > to be ASF distributed software. > [ ... ] > 2) We go for the full release vote, but this is a serious process, much > more than what is needed for this tool. If one really wants to do it > right, you need a release manager, binding votes, sources in dist/, GPG > signing the way the ASF wants it, old sources preserved in the ASF > archives... [orcmid]
I'm puzzled about one thing. There are small Apache projects. I suspect there are more small ones than large ones. Yet, making releases does not seem to be that burdensome to those projects. They have it work and they satisfy the Apache requirements for releases and the integrity of Apache-released code. The UNO Tools work strikes me as a commendable way of spinning out useful releases on the same cadence as small projects manage. (It is also a small case that sort of demonstrates the process and how it is achievable.) Now it is a bit of a problem that this has been a one-committer effort, and it would be great if supported by more contributors. Having some community building around this component of AOO would be valuable. With that, the release process should become systematic and sustainability would also be addressed. Isn't that worth looking into? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
