Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

Thanks Bowen, Jeremiah, Brandon, Erick. Without any further questions or objections, my plan is to move ahead with these changes tomorrow. On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 at 09:10, Erick Ramirez wrote: > +1 from me. I think this will make it easier for new users. We just need > to document the procedure an

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

+1 from me. I think this will make it easier for new users. We just need to document the procedure and make it obvious to everyone else that they need to update their source. Cheers!

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

> 3. ASF Infra is requesting we remove the rpm/deb files from downloads.a.o > asap. > To be accurate: ASF Infra is requiring that we fix by (extra superfluous) signing and re-voting on all past rpm/deb rpm/deb files, OR remove them from downloads.a.o, asap. Resigning and re-voting all rpm/deb pa

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

I see. In that case, stick to the original plan makes more sense. On 11/08/2022 22:46, Mick Semb Wever wrote: We should have the new domain/URL created before the final move is made, and redirecting to the existing download.apache.org for the time be

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

> > We should have the new domain/URL created before the final move is made, > and redirecting to the existing download.apache.org for the time being. > This will ensure users can have a transition time and avoid causing a > cliff edge moment. > Good idea, but in this situation it would only comp

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

I see. Now I fully understand the change. There's no objections from me, everything sounds fine. We should have the new domain/URL created before the final move is made, and redirecting to the existing download.apache.org for the time being. This will ensure users can have a transition time an

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

Nothing is changing in regard to signing. Both package management systems have their own system for that which will remain. The package locations are being moved because downloads.apache.org wants another level of (superfluous) signing on top of that, which we do not currently have. Kind Regards

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

The signing of the rpm/deb packages (and their repos) will not change. Only the URL to the rpm/deb repo changes. All files (checksums and signatures) otherwise remain identical. On Thu, 11 Aug 2022 at 23:20, Bowen Song via dev wrote: > In that case, the move from signed RPM/DEB to unsigned can

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

In that case, the move from signed RPM/DEB to unsigned can be quiet problematic to some enterprise users. On 11/08/2022 22:16, Jeremiah D Jordan wrote: For ASF project the binary release are always considered as “convenience binaries”, the official release is always just the source artifacts.

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

For ASF project the binary release are always considered as “convenience binaries”, the official release is always just the source artifacts. See the ASF release policy for more information. https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#compiled-packages

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

I'm a bit unclear what's the scope of this change. Is it limited to the "*-bin.tar.gz" files only? I would assume the RPM/DEB packages are considered as parts of the "official releases", and aren't affected by this change. Am I right? On 11/08/2022 21:59, Mick Semb Wever wrote: > /Thes

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

> > *These repositories and their binaries are "convenience binaries" and > not the official Cassandra source binaries* > > Then where are the official binaries? > Wrong wording there., thanks for catching me. The official *releases* are the source artefacts, e.g. the *-src.tar.gz in https://down

Re: [PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

> /These repositories and their binaries are "convenience binaries" and not the official Cassandra source binaries/ Then where are the official binaries? On 11/08/2022 21:40, Mick Semb Wever wrote: The proposal is to move our official debian and redhat repositories from downloads.apache.org

[PROPOSAL] Moving deb/rpm repositories from downloads.apache.org to apache.jfrog.io

The proposal is to move our official debian and redhat repositories from downloads.apache.org to Apache's JFrog Artifactory server at apache.jfrog.io , fronting it with the url aliases debian.cassandra.apache.org and redhat.cassandra.apache.org That is to replace the following URLs from https://do