On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Ethan Jewett <[email protected]> wrote: > I only have two things to add here (assuming that this is the > definition of a release within Apache): > > 1. My original concern: I think that nearly all the changes in JIRA > that are assigned to Release-1.0-RC2 should be moved to something else > called Release-1.1. We already agreed on a locked scope for release > 1.0 and I don't think we should add anything to 1.0 release candidates > aside from things we have agreed are blocking bugs. ESME-162 (mailto > actions crash the server) is probably an example of something that > should stay in Release-1.0-RC2.
Agreed but does that mean that just bug fixes are placed in Release-1.0-RCs.? ESME-100 (finish Web UI) is an example > of something that should *not* stay in Release-1.0-RC2. > > 2. Not to pick on our mentors, but this definition doesn't make any > sense to me. It is aligned with the official Apache release definition > at http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what but we've just moved > the question from the definition of "release" to the definition of > "the act of publishing it beyond the ESME group of developers (this > mailing list)". If this is the definition of an Apache release, then > the publicly accessible SVN repository is a release. I have a hard > time believing that if I do an export from the ESME SVN repo and > upload it to my people.apache.org page to facilitate testing that this > constitutes a significantly different action from sending someone > instructions on exporting the SVN repo themselves. But you are forgetting the community aspect of voting. > > I suggest that we work with a narrower definition. Something like "a > signed tarball published to http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/esme/ > and advertised on the public ESME website and/or the public mailing > list is a release". > > Ethan > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:19 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Richard Hirsch <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I think there are different definitions of "release" that are confusing >>> things. >>> >>> One is a release from the perspective of ASF which is concerned with >>> the process (votes on the MLs, etc.) and certain legal requirements. >>> I think Gianugo's last email expresses this focus on this consensus. >>> What is released (alpha release, beta release, RC, etc.) is here not >>> the focus.... >> >> Just to reiterate, according to http://apache.org/dev/release.html a >> release is "anything that is published beyond the group that owns it", >> so as soon as a release is made available for download on the ESME >> website (as opposed to just being mentioned here) it is an Apache >> release. >> >> Even naming it "junk release not to be used" won't make a difference, >> if it's published it has to be voted on. >> >> Naming an SVN tag or internally distributed tarball "release" doesn't >> make it a release either - it's the act of publishing it beyond the >> ESME group of developers (this mailing list) that makes a release and >> requires a vote. >> >> -Bertrand >> >
