kou commented on issue #279:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-julia/issues/279#issuecomment-1028620355


   > > It seems that this process doesn't satisfy 
https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html (see also 
https://infra.apache.org/release-publishing.html ).
   > 
   > @kou, can you clarify what specifically my proposal doesn't satisfy in the 
linked apache release policies?
   
   Yes.
   
   (I know that we can improve the proposal without drastic changes to satisfy 
the release policy.)
   
   1. Source archive is missing for vote
   
   https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#source-packages
   
   > Every ASF release MUST contain one or more source packages, which MUST be 
sufficient for a user to build and test the release provided they have access 
to the appropriate platform and tools.
   
   https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
   
   > individuals are REQUIRED to download all signed source code packages onto 
their own hardware
   
   The proposal doesn't provide "source code packages" for vote. It just 
provides a commit hash.
   
   2. Signing is missing for vote
   
   https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
   
   > individuals are REQUIRED to download all signed source code packages onto 
their own hardware
   
   > validate all cryptographic signatures
   
   The proposal doesn't provide "signed" source code packages for vote. It just 
provides a commit hash.
   
   3. Vote target and released target are different
   
   https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-types
   
   > Releases are packages that have been approved
   
   The proposal changes `Project.toml` after vote:
   
   > If the vote does pass, we increment the Project.toml version number 
matching the voted proposal, commit the change
   
   If we change something after the vote, changed source isn't approved.
   
   > I would like to hopefully move this discussion along since the project is 
stalled out until we can solidify the new release process; in hindsight, we 
should have figured out all these details before donation to make the transfer 
more smooth.
   
   How about using the same release process as apache/arrow-rs as the first 
step? (I assumed that you think so.)
   
   It's an established release process because apache/arrow-rs has been 
released 10 or more times.
   
   We can use the apache/arrow-rs process by just porting 
https://github.com/apache/arrow-rs/tree/master/dev/release to 
apache/arrow-julia. We'll be able to release a new version sooner than 
implementing the proposal. If you like, I can port it.
   
   We can improve our release process incrementally after we release a new 
version with the apache/arrow-rs process. We can still use JuliaTagBot after we 
upload the approved source package to https://downloads.apache.org/arrow/ .
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


Reply via email to