incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <>
Subject Re: apache binary distributions
Date Sun, 16 Aug 2015 19:29:59 GMT
Seems like for the past two weeks I only have weekends to respond :-(
Apologies for the delay on this thread.

On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 7:30 PM, Ted Dunning <> wrote:
>> > 1) The concept of a brand covering some artifact doesn't come into play
>> at
>> > all. Instead, there are two things that happen.  The first is that the
>> PMC
>> > approves releases which defines each such release as an Apache release.
>> > The second process is that the ASF controls the use of its trademarks.
>> The question is: do we have ASF-wide trademark guidelines or do
>> we allow each PMC to make those as they go.
> Yes. We do have ASF-wide trademark guidelines and we also allow PMC's to
> have pretty broad latitude within those boundaries.  The PMC definitely
> should not be making things up, but they do have a lot of responsibility
> for deciding what they don't like.

I don't think I was clear: I understand that ASF has foundation-wide
trademark guidelines, what I was asking is: are we allowing PMCs
to put additional constraints on top of those.

> How is the release policy not clear (
> when it
> says:
>All releases are in the form of the source materials needed to make changes
> > to the software
>And then it says
>In all such cases, the binary/bytecode package must have the same version
> number as the source release and may only add binary/bytecode files that
> are the result of compiling that version of the source code release.

Right. So what happens to at least 4 different (and I do mean different) ways
of building Hadoop? Are these all different distributions? Do ALL of them
need to be blessed by PMC?

> The Hadoop PMC is utterly free to produce a Hadoop RPM with Hadoop in it
> that corresponds to an Apache Hadoop release.  Having project Foo produce a
> release of Bar, Baz and Pigdog is pretty far off the reservation, however.

It is. But if they screw up packaging guidelines inadvertently and the
want to take matters in their own hands -- how is it "off the reservation"?

Remember -- we're still talking producing binary packages from exact same
source release that PMC blessed -- just using different build and packaging


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message