incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Konstantin Boudnik <>
Subject Re: ASF hosted binaries collecting user data without an explicit opt-in
Date Tue, 06 Jun 2017 04:16:50 GMT
While I am completely agree with your point, and the Ignite graduation
is the water under the bridge, this is in an important point for the
current podlings to consider. Perhaps it could be done elsewhere as
well, but I am not sure where would be the best place for it.

  Take care,
Konstantin (Cos) Boudnik
2CAC 8312 4870 D885 8616  6115 220F 6980 1F27 E622

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this email are those of the author,
and do not necessarily represent the views of any company the author
might be affiliated with at the moment of writing.

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:25 PM, John D. Ament <> wrote:
> While these are all great discussion points, I don't believe they're
> relevant to incubator only and probably should have remained on the
> legal-discuss list.  Ignite graduated ~2 years ago.  The incubator probably
> doesn't have an opinion about this, but it's good to know that the policy
> may change (and I do personally have an opinion on said types of software).
> John
> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 11:16 PM Roman Shaposhnik <>
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Julian Hyde <> wrote:
>> > Thanks for the explanation, Roman. I had no idea that policies for
>> hosted binaries
>> > were stricter than for source code (other than the obvious effect on
>> licensing when you bundle in dependencies).
>> Btw, this one is serious enough that I'd like us to update our release
>> policy based on the
>> learnings here.
>> So far it seems that there's an agreement on that having this type of
>> capability...
>>    1 ... in the source code disabled by default -- totally OK
>>    2 ... in the source code enabled by default -- questionable, but OK
>>    3 ... in the binary hosted by ASF disabled by default -- OK
>>    4 ... in the binary hosted by ASF enabled by default -- NOT OK
>> #4 can get nuanced if we want to invest in ASF managed infrastructure that
>> is
>> responsible for update tracking and user data collection. With my ASF hat
>> on,
>> I'd say that INFRA should probably stay away from user data
>> collection/retention.
>> That still leaves a possibility of a a ping/pong API that only
>> consumes a name of ASF
>> project and its version and returns a JSON object of some kind as per
>> PMC choice.
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message