> On 8 Mar 2017, at 16:27, Danny Angus <da...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi > I would love to be the kind of guy who would set out a series of topics > that we need to discuss, contextualise them and initiate each one, > collating the output at the end, but I'm not. > > So I have a question for the people who have mentioned lack of releases as > a problem.. > > The idea behind "no releases" was that a release implies that certain > standards common to the ASF are being met, standards which Labs don't > apply, and that if a lab needs to cut a release it probably has enough > users and maintainers to become a project of its own. > > So my question to those people is this; Is it the lack of the formality and > assurance that is a problem or the lack of a build? Would "pre-release > downloads" be enough?
Seen from what I learned….even a one person community want to have “something” out there, that is equal to a release. So no the term “pre-release downloads” would not really make many happy (that can be done and are done already today). If you look at incubator, they have a slightly different set of release rules. I had a vision of something called “LABS-Release, limited responsibility”. We would still do the IP check etc, but not have a 3 person PMC voting. If you compare with GitHub, I can make a release every day if I want (and call it a release), so why limit myself ? rgds jan I. > > d. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: labs-unsubscr...@labs.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: labs-h...@labs.apache.org
