> On May 4, 2026, at 8:15 AM, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Damn,
>
> It seems that no matter what we do - "source" links will always appear
> there (after some time :X). But then, we do not have to upload "our"
> packages there.
>
> This is what I proposed to the Airflow PMC. Perhaps we can take it as an
> example of how it can be "clearly" marked? (you can see it in my Airflow
> fork) [1]:
>
> The only authoritative source for Apache Airflow 3.2.1 release
> artifacts is the official downloads page at:
>
> https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/3.2.1/installation/installing-from-sources.html
> That page lists the source tarballs, wheels, detached .asc signatures,
> and .sha512 checksums published by the ASF, with instructions for
> verifying each — including the project's signing keys at
> https://downloads.apache.org/airflow/KEYS.
>
> Note: the "Source code (zip)" and "Source code (tar.gz)" attachments
> on this page are GitHub-generated snapshots of the git tag. They are
> not official ASF releases, are not signed, and may differ
> from the canonical artifacts on the downloads page above.
I would remove “may” since these will differ almost always.
Best,
Dave
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/potiuk/airflow/releases/tag/release-rendering-test-3.2.1
> -
>
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2026 at 10:37 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> And sorry for getting your name wrong - autocorrect can be the worse
>> sometimes
>> No problem, it happens to me all the time, Josef ;)
>>
>> Regarding GitHub releases, I’ve confirmed it is possible to maintain
>> release pages containing only release notes without attached binaries.
>> Airflow is currently running a lazy consensus [1] to remove binaries from
>> GitHub and instead provide links to our official download page [2] and
>> PyPI. We will include a note that our PyPI packages are bit-to-bit
>> identical to the SVN artifacts and have passed all required checks and
>> votes.
>>
>> I believe this is the best approach because it maintains the familiarity
>> of GitHub release notes for users while eliminating concerns regarding
>> artifact immutability or multiple "sources of truth." You can see a preview
>> of the throwaway script to do in this PR [3] and a live example on my
>> private fork [4].
>>
>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/5x55mvorsrkc4ny16v55d71bbs9djm6y
>> [2] https://infra.apache.org/release-download-pages.html
>> [3] https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/66314
>> [4]
>> https://github.com/potiuk/airflow/releases/tag/release-rendering-test-3.2.1
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jarek
>>
>> On Sun, May 3, 2026 at 6:59 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Justin,
>>>
>>> I will check but I guess it's the "default" GH Release. Let me check on
>>> the
>>> podliings I mentor.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 2, 2026 at 12:10 PM Justin Mclean <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I also checked current podlings against the Incubator GitHub
>>> distribution
>>>> guidance:
>>>> https://incubator.apache.org/guides/distribution.html#github
>>>>
>>>> The following podlings appear to have GitHub Releases that may need
>>>> cleanup/extra info added:
>>>> - Burr
>>>> - Casbin
>>>> - Fluss
>>>> - GraphAr
>>>> - Hamilton
>>>> - Iggy
>>>> - OzHera
>>>> - ResilientDB
>>>>
>>>> Again, this was done with a script and could be incomplete or incorrect.
>>>>
>>>> Could mentors and PPMCs please check that GitHub Releases include the
>>>> incubating disclaimer where needed, and that RCs, nightlies, and
>>> snapshots
>>>> etc are marked as GitHub pre-releases?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Justin
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
