Uploaded new binaries hadoop-2.7.4-RC0.tar.gz, which adds lib/native/. Same place: http://home.apache.org/~shv/hadoop-2.7.4-RC0/
Thanks, --Konstantin On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Chris Douglas <cdoug...@apache.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Konstantin Shvachko > <shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > > For the packaging, here is the exact phrasing from the sited > release-policy > > document relevant to binaries: > > "As a convenience to users that might not have the appropriate tools to > > build a compiled version of the source, binary/bytecode packages MAY be > > distributed alongside official Apache releases. In all such cases, the > > binary/bytecode package MUST have the same version number as the source > > release and MUST only add binary/bytecode files that are the result of > > compiling that version of the source code release and its dependencies." > > I don't think my binary package violates any of these. > > +1 The PMC VOTE applies to source code, only. If someone wants to > rebuild the binary tarball with native libs and replace this one, > that's fine. > > My reading of the above is that source code must be distributed with > binaries, not that we omit the source code from binary releases... -C > > > But I'll upload an additional tar.gz with native bits and no src, as you > > guys requested. > > Will keep it as RC0 as there is no source code change and it comes from > the > > same build. > > Hope this is satisfactory. > > > > Thanks, > > --Konstantin > > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Andrew Wang <andrew.w...@cloudera.com> > > wrote: > > > >> I agree with Brahma on the two issues flagged (having src in the binary > >> tarball, missing native libs). These are regressions from prior > releases. > >> > >> As an aside, "we release binaries as a convenience" doesn't relax the > >> quality bar. The binaries are linked on our website and distributed > through > >> official Apache channels. They have to adhere to Apache release > >> requirements. And, most users consume our work via Maven dependencies, > >> which are binary artifacts. > >> > >> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html goes into this in more > >> detail. A release must minimally include source packages, and can also > >> include binary artifacts. > >> > >> Best, > >> Andrew > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Konstantin Shvachko < > >> shv.had...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> To avoid any confusion in this regard. I built RC0 manually in > compliance > >>> with Apache release policy > >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html > >>> I edited the HowToReleasePreDSBCR page to make sure people don't use > >>> Jenkins option for building. > >>> > >>> A side note. This particular build is broken anyways, so no worries > there. > >>> I think though it would be useful to have it working for testing and > as a > >>> packaging standard. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> --Konstantin > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Allen Wittenauer < > >>> a...@effectivemachines.com > >>> > wrote: > >>> > >>> > > >>> > > On Jul 31, 2017, at 11:20 AM, Konstantin Shvachko < > >>> shv.had...@gmail.com> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > > https://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HowToReleasePreDSBCR > >>> > > >>> > FYI: > >>> > > >>> > If you are using ASF Jenkins to create an ASF release > >>> > artifact, it's pretty much an automatic vote failure as any such > >>> release is > >>> > in violation of ASF policy. > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >> > >> >
