incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: New disclaimer text
Date Fri, 12 Jul 2019 23:07:37 GMT
Agreed, this sounds like a great way to do this. As IPMC members reviewing
releases, you now have better guidelines on how to go about reviewing a
podling release.

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 17:59, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:

> This is a great idea... +1
>
> > On Jul 12, 2019, at 6:31 PM, Craig Russell <apache.clr@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I understand I'm a bit late to this particular discussion, but perhaps
> we can consider two different disclaimers that podlings can choose:
> >
> > The standard disclaimer that does not disclaim licensing issues; or,
> >
> > The proposed new disclaimer to be used by podlings' first releases until
> they sort their licensing issues
> >
> > This "split roll" allows "mature" podlings the ability to assuage their
> downstream that they have their licensing issues in hand.
> >
> > Use of the current disclaimer means that any licensing issues found
> during release voting would cancel the release and require a respin.
> >
> > Use of the proposed new disclaimer would allow new-ish podlings to get
> on with releasing while they sort any licensing issues.
> >
> > And we can add to the Maturity Model a section that discusses that the
> podling has had at least one release with the standard disclaimer.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Craig
> >
> >> On Jul 10, 2019, at 2:44 PM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> Speaking as a member of a currently-incubating project (Apache Druid)
> where
> >>> we have always strived to do releases with no known licensing issues,
> the
> >>> text sounds needlessly scary to downstream consumers.
> >>
> >> And that may be the problem with a one solution fits all process. It
> has been suggested before we let podlings choose which release process they
> want.  However that may get too complex and make voting on releases
> inconsistent.
> >>
> >>> IMO this disclaims too much, and would chill adoption of incubating
> >>> software by people that care about having clean licensing. PPMCs
> should be
> >>> able to say "we believe this release is clean and have vetted it using
> a
> >>> normal Apache vetting process" or maybe even "we have vetted this
> release
> >>> and it is clean other than the following list of known issues". If they
> >>> can't say one of those two statements, then maybe it's not time to do
> their
> >>> first release yet.
> >>
> >> The idea is to allow podlings to make releases that may not comply with
> policy. Have a hard switch from your releases doesn’t comply to everything
> must comply is too difficult for some podlings.
> >>
> >>> And yeah, as a few others have mentioned, I believe that a more
> streamlined
> >>> voting process
> >>
> >> That I think is a different issue, ands may be best to start another
> thread on that. The main issue here is that IPMC members votes are binding,
> and not all mentors (who are IPMC members) vote on releases, so podlings
> need votes from the wider IPMC members to make releases (in about 90%+ of
> cases). There been a few ideas on how to improve this, including one
> approved method (but no podlings have take that up yet).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Justin
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> > clr@apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
> --
Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message