Hi Yufei, Regarding the proposed nightly build, I agree with your suggestion and am completely in favor, provided all legal aspects are fully vetted and compliant (it's blocker for publication, as I said in the Python CLI thread).
I would be happy to volunteer to assist with the necessary legal checks for the MCP server. Thanks! Regards, JB On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 9:59 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Thanks for chiming in on the package naming discussion and appreciate all > the feedback so far. I’d like to leave a bit more time for others to weigh > in as well, in case there are additional concerns or suggestions. > > In parallel, here’s the proposed next step so we can keep making progress: > Publish a nightly build to PyPI as part of our GitHub CI workflow. This > will help us validate the packaging structure early, catch issues sooner, > and give contributors an easy way to try the MCP server from PyPI before > the first official release. > > Please feel free to continue the discussion. > > Yufei > > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 8:14 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Yufei, > > > > The name "apache-polaris-mcp" LGTM. > > > > Cheers, > > Dmitri. > > > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 1:34 PM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > I’d like to propose standardizing the PyPI package name for the new > > Polaris > > > MCP server as *apache-polaris-mcp.* > > > > > > This follows the naming conventions used by other Apache projects on PyPI > > > (e.g., apache-airflow, apache-beam, apache-libcloud) and matches PyPI’s > > > canonical normalization rules. Using the lowercase hyphenated form > > directly > > > keeps things consistent for users, avoids normalization surprises, and > > > aligns better with ASF branding. > > > > > > This also follows the naming convention we discussed > > > <https://lists.apache.org/thread/7fnnwdb2rnxmb2tk0yo8jh5mt7s325dx> for > > > Polaris CLI tool. A clarification regarding packaging: > > > The MCP server package cannot be combined with the Polaris CLI tools > > > package, even if we wanted to. The two components live in different > > > repositories and use separate pyproject.toml configurations. Because of > > > this, there is no clean or practical way to publish them as a single PyPI > > > distribution without major restructuring(e.g., moving MCP server to the > > > main repo). > > > > > > If there are concerns or alternative suggestions, please reply. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Yufei > > > > >
