Hi YorkShen, On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 3:29 PM 申远 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > What's more: a convenience binary shouldn't contain the compilation of > > anything not in the code release. It sounds like what you're publishing > > there isn't actually Apache Weex, but "based on Apache Weex". > > > Well, what happens here is that there are two libraries in the git repo of > incubator-weex, namely weex_sdk and weex playground. Apache Weex release > only contains weex_sdk, and we publish weex_sdk as a convenience binary > after the Apache Release as well. Then we used to publish weex playground > to ios App Store in the name of Taobao(China) as we need an apple > developer/enterprise account to do so. > You'll need to send weex playground through your voting and release process as a source code release too, otherwise you can't call the binary release Weex to the rest of the world. Since you're already doing releases for weex_sdk, though, you know how to do this. It's not uncommon for a single project to release multiple code bases, sometimes on inconsistent schedules. Although it might be a challenge with only one release manager. > > As INFRA[1] owned an Apple developer account, Thank you, I learned something. > I think we could separate > weex_sdk and weex playground into two repos and publish Weex playground in > the name of ASF. I personally prefer the multi-repo development model, and Apache does support it. But it's not a requirement. It's up to y'all. If you need help getting another repo, let me know. Best Regards, Myrle
