> On Apr 24, 2014, at 9:37, Aric Coady <aric.co...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Apr 24, 2014, at 8:07 AM, Thomas Koch <k...@orbiteam.de> wrote: >> Hi Andi, >> >> I don't agree that it is unimportant to make PyLucene releases. Without a >> ready-to-run software package the hurdles to use PyLucene are raised. It is >> already not quite simple (for beginners) to install PyLucene on the various >> platforms. Having a packaged release that is tested by some users provides a >> benefit to the community in my opinion. > > Relatedly, I have a pull request open to add a pylucene formula to homebrew. > So mac users will be able to simply ‘brew install pylucene’. That would be > more consistent with having releases.
I agree. I think pylucene is distributed by some linux distributions too. Having a set tarball for a release makes this easier for sure. Andi.. > >> However I can understand your arguments - there has been little feedback on >> your release announcements on the list recently. On the other hand there are >> frequent discussions about PyLucene on the list so I don't think the >> interest has declined. Did you check the number of downloads of the PyLucene >> distributions (if this is possible at all - due to the distributed releases >> on the apache mirrors ...)? This would be a more accurate indicator from my >> point of view. >> >> I must also admit that I did never understand the voting process in detail - >> i.e. who are the PMC members and what impact have votes of non PMC users. >> Maybe some more transparency and another "call for action" would help to >> raise awareness in the community. >> >> Just my thoughts... >> >> >> regards, >> Thomas >> -- >> OrbiTeam Software GmbH & Co. KG >> http://www.orbiteam.de >> >> >>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >>> Von: Andi Vajda [mailto:va...@apache.org] >>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. April 2014 02:28 >>> An: pylucene-dev@lucene.apache.org >>> Betreff: release votes >>> >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Given the tiny amount of interest the pylucene releases create, it's maybe >>> become unimportant to actually make PyLucene releases ? >>> >>> The release votes have had an increasingly difficult time to garner the >> three >>> required PMC votes to pass. Non PMC users are also eerily quiet. >>> >>> Maybe the time has come to switch to a different model: >>> >>> - when a Lucene release happens, a PyLucene branch gets created with all >>> the necessary changes to build successfully and pass all tests against >>> this Lucene release >>> - users interested in PyLucene check out that branch >>> - done >>> >>> - no more releases, no more votes >>> >>> JCC can continue to be released to PyPI independently as it is today. >>> That doesn't require any voting anyway (?). >>> >>> What do readers of this list think ? >>> >>> Andi.. >
