I agree with all of Justin McLean's points. I absolutely don't care what non-ASF projects do. I care about the ASF rules and norms.
On Sun, 6 Aug 2023 at 14:44, Matthew de Detrich <matthew.dedetr...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote: > > > I remain strongly opposed to publishing to maven central without a > full release process with 2 phase voting. > > Can you elaborate on this opposition? There is plenty of software that is > distributed on maven using commonly established milestone suffix > (i.e. -M0, -M1 etc etc) and I would argue it's far from controversial to > state that it's extremely clear for users that such an artifact is a > milestone, this is already established. > > I just want to know where you are coming from, because if it's just due > to it being a rule/Apache process this is what I want to clarify (if there > is a clear specific rule on this that this is not allowed; which has yet > to be provided yet then yes I will drop it). > > On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 3:30 PM PJ Fanning <fannin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I remain strongly opposed to publishing to maven central without full > > release process with 2 phase voting. > > > > I can live with putting milestone jars elsewhere like > > nightlies.apache.org. We used to have a CI job that published jars to > > nightlies.apache.org. This can easily be dusted down and repurposed. > > My vague recollection was that the jars were published in a Maven repo > > compatible data structure so that they were easily consumable in > > mvn/gradle/sbt builds. > > > > On Sun, 6 Aug 2023 at 14:18, Matthew de Detrich > > <matthew.dedetr...@aiven.io.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > And we can release voted on milestones. > > > > > > We can but for reasons stated earlier this to me seems like a bandaid > > > and as you pointed out in [1] we are having issues currently with getting > > > enough votes for releases. Hence my biggest complaint here is that > > > requiring votes sends the wrong signals, after all one of the main points > > > of my suggested use of milestones is to test published milestones in > > > downstream modules to confirm that they are suitable for general public > > > consumption which is the point that Justin raised earlier. > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > While this is (for now) fine at least for one case (i.e. users/developers > > > testing quick changes which is intended use for snapshots) it doesn't > > > practically alleviate the other case regarding testing downstream pekko > > > modules with more recent upstream pekko changes. > > > > > > Using snapshots for this means we have to continuously add/remove > > > the Apache Nexus snapshot repository in the downstream modules build > > > files. > > > > > > This point in general actually becoming increasingly more important now > > > considering we are getting significant changes merged upstream in the > > > Pekko 1.1.x series and our current approach of only bringing in the > > > changes when a release candidate is being voted on means that > > > we will be bringing in ~6-12 months of changes all at once at an > > > inopportune time (i.e. a release is being made) > > > > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/b57nmyrg5xhgdv3gnbq2o9s6wsqf31q6 > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 2:57 PM PJ Fanning <fannin...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > 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
