And we can release voted on milestones. In the meantime, we have:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PEKKO/Testing+with+Pekko+Snapshot+Jars Which is not ideal but it does provide some help. On Sun, 6 Aug 2023 at 13:38, Matthew de Detrich <matthew.dedetr...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote: > > > Nobody is threatening to delete our recent snapshots. There is a > question about what to do about older snapshots - which is separate > from this topic. > > I am not saying that people will be deleting our snapshots, but rather > there is a current problem with them being pruned (or more correctly > not being pruned as expected) which needs to be resolved. > > > Anyone who wants to test the latest pekko 1.1.0 preview can track down > versions at > The core point is while its possible for users to manually track snapshots > and update them as new ones get released/old ones get deleted this is not > practical for the use case I mentioned earlier where we want to set the > downstream Pekko modules versions to a more frequently built non release > version so we can catch regressions and/or make sure that newly merged > features work as expected. > > If we use snapshots for this then we have the overhead of having to > manually update snapshots versions when builds break due to > snapshots not existing anymore (note that this hasn't been a problem for now > because the snapshot pruning is not working correctly which is the problem > I was referring to before). > > Furthermore if developers want to test newly merged features into > development/staging/prod systems to see that there aren't regressions, > assuming the snapshots are working correctly (which they currently aren't) > they can also hit the same issues regarding the snapshots being pruned. > > At least to me, this is one of the core problems that the milestone > concept is intended to solve, snapshots are too frequent/granular and > releases/release candidates are too infrequent. > > On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 2:23 PM PJ Fanning <fannin...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Nobody is threatening to delete our recent snapshots. There is a > > question about what to do about older snapshots - which is separate > > from this topic. > > > > Anyone who wants to test the latest pekko 1.1.0 preview can track down > > versions at > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/snapshots/org/apache/pekko/pekko-actor-typed_2.13/ > > > > 1.1.0-M0+5-964dcf53-SNAPSHOT is the most recent - but there will be > > new snapshots published most nights (any day that has commits to the > > main branch). > > > > On Sun, 6 Aug 2023 at 13:08, Matthew de Detrich > > <matthew.dedetr...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > The question to ask is, will these artefacts be used by users or > > intended > > > for their use? i.e. people who are not subscribed to the mailing list or > > > not committers or PMC members? If so, then by ASF definition, that > > artefact > > > is a release and needs to be voted on by the PPMC/IPMC. > > > > > > No they aren't, as I said they are treated in the exact same way > > snapshots > > > are currently treated. The **ONLY** difference is that they will be > > > distributed to the Apache Nexus main repository and this is mainly due to > > > technical reasons stated before (i.e. snapshots are semi-permanent since > > > they need to be pruned). > > > > > > The primary motivation for the milestone artifacts are > > > > > > * Internal testing between the Pekko dependencies (i.e. publishing an > > > artifact of Pekko core and using that artifact in in other Pekko modules > > to > > > catch regressions before a release is marked) > > > * For Pekko developers to have the ability to test their features which > > > were merged into main in their production systems without having to > > > manually build Pekko (and possibly all of Pekko's dependencies) > > themselves, > > > which also as stated previously is quite difficult > > > > > > There is no intention of the milestones having any formal release > > > announcement. > > > > > > > Have other incubating projects made non-ASF releases while in > > incubation? > > > In a small number of cases, yes, mostly while they were getting their > > code > > > base in order but not after they had made an ASF release, and there we > > very > > > clearly labelled as non-ASF releases. > > > > > > Yes and this is not meant to be a formal ASF release, hence the previous > > > suggestion of making this clear even in the DISCLAIMER file > > > > > > > Re official documentation/process that describes this distinction? Yes, > > > that policy page sets that out. See, for instance [1] and [2] for why it > > > needs to be this way. > > > > > > [1] Is talking about source packages, this discussion is about binary > > > artifacts. In the last line they mention this > > > > > > > Nightly Builds that are not release candidates can be hosted at > > > ci.apache.org projects area, just file an INFRA ticket. > > > > > > The links to ci.apache.org aren't even working and I doubt we can even > > use > > > such a repository since we are dealing with JVM jar's specifically > > > > > > > Re official documentation/process that describes this distinction? Yes, > > > that policy page sets that out. See, for instance [1] and [2] for why it > > > needs to be this way. The Incubator distribution guideline also covers > > this > > > [3]. You see that at [4] "Release candidates, nightlys and snapshots must > > > not be advertised to the general public.” and you can read [5] for why. > > The > > > release distribution policy also touches on this e.g. [6] > > > > > > As was clarified earlier, milestones are **NOT** releases, they are > > treated > > > the exact same way as snapshots, nightlies or release candidates with the > > > **ONLY** critical difference being that they are deployed in a repository > > > that is not snapshots and they are published less frequently then a > > > snapshot/nightly is. > > > > > > With this being said I am increasingly of the opinion that this is more > > of > > > a technical INFRA question than an ASF policy question since the issues > > > being discussed are technical in nature. There was never a suggestion of > > > making an alternative formal type of ASF release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 10:51 AM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > The question to ask is, will these artefacts be used by users or > > intended > > > > for their use? i.e. people who are not subscribed to the mailing list > > or > > > > not committers or PMC members? If so, then by ASF definition, that > > artefact > > > > is a release and needs to be voted on by the PPMC/IPMC. > > > > > > > > Have other incubating projects made non-ASF releases while in > > incubation? > > > > In a small number of cases, yes, mostly while they were getting their > > code > > > > base in order but not after they had made an ASF release, and there we > > very > > > > clearly labelled as non-ASF releases. > > > > > > > > Re official documentation/process that describes this distinction? Yes, > > > > that policy page sets that out. See, for instance [1] and [2] for why > > it > > > > needs to be this way. The Incubator distribution guideline also covers > > this > > > > [3]. You see that at [4] "Release candidates, nightlys and snapshots > > must > > > > not be advertised to the general public.” and you can read [5] for > > why. The > > > > release distribution policy also touches on this e.g. [6] > > > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > 1. https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#host-rc > > > > 2. https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#why > > > > 3. > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/Distribution+Guidelines > > > > 4. > > https://incubator.apache.org/guides/distribution.html#release_platforms > > > > 5. https://incubator.apache.org/guides/distribution.html#motivation > > > > 6. https://infra.apache.org/release-distribution.html#maven > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pekko.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@pekko.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Matthew de Detrich > > > > > > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > > > > > > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > > > > > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > > > > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > > > > > *m:* +491603708037 > > > > > > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetr...@aiven.io > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pekko.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@pekko.apache.org > > > > > > -- > > Matthew de Detrich > > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > *m:* +491603708037 > > *w:* aiven.io *e:* matthew.dedetr...@aiven.io --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@pekko.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@pekko.apache.org
