On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 8:32 PM, moon soo Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Roman for information about ASF-wide docker index. > > And, about binary release, >> AFAIK by apache release policy nothing, except the source code, is >> considered to be an 'official release'. > > I think Apache's release policy has some guide lines for providing binary > package. > According to http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what, binary package > must have the same version number to source release, and unreleased source > can not be linked/distributed to the public.
With binaries the line gets blurry. With things like Docker even more so. Keeping those types of guidelines in mind is always useful, but you also have to be able to provide software to your users. Consider Docker: every Docker image typically has a base OS that is licensed under variety of different licenses, but GPL is deffintely one of them. All of sudden you have a binary 'release' that is under GPL. Not longer ALv2. > So isn't it reasonable to think binary that came from unreleased source > code can not be distributed ? This depends on what distribution means. Like I said in case of Docker there's no clear answer and in fact you guys can help shape the outcome. Keep an eye on general@incubator and dev@community. A docker discussion is coming there very soon. Thanks, Roman.
