Hmm. My understanding was that only sources constituted a "release" and
that all release votes were to be understood as votes on a body of source
code. However, we've always (at least for the last 2+ years that I've been
involved in the RM side) distributed binary tarball (and often rpms and
debs), ALONG WITH the source tarball, for the convenience of our many users
who don't care to do builds before using a release. The binaries and
source-containing artifacts are all signed for tamper-resistance, and when
a Release Manager distributes a set of stuff, the binaries should be
understood to come from the same build as the source tarball -- as is
indeed the case here.
Furthermore, I believe the Hadoop-related projects make use of a Maven
server. I don't believe it's distributing source only :-)
I totally agree that the official release is the sources. But to go from
there to a prohibition on distributing objects would, I think, cripple the
project, and certainly goes against the tradition of common usage in
opensource projects, including many Apache projects.
Respectfully,
--Matt
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Chris Douglas <cdoug...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks, Matt. As always, your work on this is hugely appreciated.
>
> As I understand it, we can't distribute binary-only artifacts. Among
> the reasons: the PMC can't verify binaries as project output, the
> non-profit charter is about source code, and users need to be able to
> modify what we distribute. I can try to track down a reference, but
> I'm pretty sure on this one... source-only is OK. Some have argued
> it's the only acceptable form. -C
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Matt Foley <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > The vote passed and we have accepted Hadoop version 1.2.0 for release:
> > +1 binding: 4 (1 slightly late)
> > +1 non-binding: 1
> > 0 none
> > -1 none
> >
> > Thanks to all who voted.
> > I'll finish publishing the release tonight and announce it to general@in
> > the morning.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > --Matt
> > release manager
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Matt Foley <mfo...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Chris,
> >> Unless I screwed up my build, hadoop-1.2.0.tar.gz includes the built
> >> artifacts as well as full buildable source and docs.
> >> Hadoop-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz is intended to contain only the built artifacts
> >> ("binaries") and deliberately excludes the source
> >> and docs, for those who wish a smaller tarball of binaries only. The
> >> artifacts in both are from the same build.
> >>
> >> So I'll take your +1 on the source tarball :-)
> >> Thanks,
> >> --Matt
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Chris Douglas <cdoug...@apache.org
> >wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 on hadoop-1.2.0.tar.gz (verified checksums, signature, ran some unit
> >>> tests)
> >>>
> >>> but hadoop-1.2.0-bin.tar.gz is missing the source code and can't be
> >>> built. -C
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Matt Foley <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> > Hi all,
> >>> > I have posted the signed tarballs for Hadoop 1.2.0-rc1 at
> >>> > http://people.apache.org/~mattf/hadoop-1.2.0-rc1/
> >>> > Release notes are at:
> >>> > releasenotes_1.2.0-rc1.html<
> >>>
> http://people.apache.org/~mattf/hadoop-1.2.0-rc1/releasenotes_1.2.0-rc1.html
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I'm having a little trouble with Nexus (it seems to have forgotten I
> >>> exist)
> >>> > but am working on that and will post to Nexus as soon as possible.
> >>> >
> >>> > In the meantime, unless there are objections, I'd like to start the
> >>> vote.
> >>> > Please review this release candidate and vote it for release. Vote
> >>> will end
> >>> > in seven days as usual, at 11:30am PDT on Monday 13 May.
> >>> >
> >>> > Best regards,
> >>> > --Matt
> >>> > (release manager)
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
