incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karl Wright <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release ManifoldCF 0.5-incubating, RC0
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2012 19:27:53 GMT
"Policy is that binaries are not endorsed by the ASF. "

I don't think anyone said anything differently.

There is a huge difference between endorsing a third-party binary and
distributing it.  But if I misunderstand and it is Apache's policy
that we don't distribute any third-party binaries then we have a huge
problem - indeed, I can't see how Apache can ship much of anything
with that constraint.  At the very minimum it should be written up
somewhere, and projects like Lucene/Solr should be whipped into line
because they've been doing this for close to a decade now, and there's
a whole body of Apache materials describing just what third-party
licensed materials can be distributed that should simply be thrown


On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Marvin Humphrey <> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 10:40 AM, Matt Hogstrom <> wrote:
>> My point is that if push came to shove, legally, I think the -bin objects
>> would be considered a distribution.
> I disagree.  The ASF only releases source.
> If I understand correctly, changing that position undermines the
> indemnification protections that have been painstakingly set up by Roy and
> others.
> Policy is that binaries are not endorsed by the ASF.  If you wish to
> change that policy and secure the backing of the ASF for binaries (which I
> will oppose), this doesn't seem like the right venue to make such a
> proposal.
> If the policy of source-only releases is confusing to some of our Java
> developers, perhaps we should revisit how we vet incubating releases of Java
> projects to emphasize this policy.
> Marvin Humphrey
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message