(With consent, shall we move this to the PMC list?) No, I don't think that's what this policy says.
First, could you please be more specific here? why do you think a certain release is at odds with this? Because so far you've mentioned, I think, not taking a Scala maintenance release update. But this says things like: The source code on which the software is based must either be identical to an Apache Software Foundation source code release or all of the following must also be true: ... - The end user expects that the distribution channel will back-port fixes. It is not necessary to back-port all fixes. Selection of fixes to back-port must be consistent with the update policy of that distribution channel. That describes what you're talking about. This also is aimed at distributions of "Apache Foo", not products that "include Apache Foo", which are clearly not Apache Foo. The spirit of it is, more generally: don't keep new features and fixes to yourself. That does not seem to apply here. On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 11:34 PM Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, All and Matei (as the Chair of Spark PMC). > > For the ASF policy violation part, here is a legal recommendation > documentation (draft) from `legal-discuss@`. > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/downstream.html#source > > > A version number must be used that both clearly differentiates it from > an Apache Software Foundation release and clearly identifies the Apache > Software Foundation version on which the software is based. > > In short, Databricks should not claim its product like "Apache Spark > 3.4.0". The version number should clearly differentiate it from Apache > Spark 3.4.0. I hope we can conclude this together in this way and move our > focus forward to the other remaining issues. > > To Matei, could you do the legal follow-up officially with Databricks with > the above info? > > If there is a person to do this, I believe you are the best person to > drive this. > > Thank you in advance. > > Dongjoon. > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 2:49 PM Dongjoon Hyun <dongj...@apache.org> wrote: > >> It goes to "legal-discuss@". >> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/mzhggd0rpz8t4d7vdsbhkp38mvd3lty4 >> >> I hope we can conclude the legal part clearly and shortly in one way or >> another which we will follow with confidence. >> >> Dongjoon >> >> On 2023/06/06 20:06:42 Dongjoon Hyun wrote: >> > Thank you, Sean, Mich, Holden, again. >> > >> > For this specific part, let's ask the ASF board via bo...@apache.org to >> > find a right answer because it's a controversial legal issue here. >> > >> > > I think you'd just prefer Databricks make a different choice, which is >> > legitimate, but, an issue to take up with Databricks, not here. >> > >> > Dongjoon. >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >> >>
