On 8 December 2016 at 01:38, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > For me, the key is the "official release" - an official release has been > voted on by the relevant PMC and approved for use. The labeling of it - > alpha, beta, etc is moot. Maybe we should take out that part and instead > use: > > Only release artifacts that have been approved by the relevant PMC may be > linked from the download page. All other download links should be removed > in a timely fashion.
"All other download links should be removed" - there is no grace period. The reference to timely removal of links applies to alpha/beta/etc releases which are expected to be short-lived. They should not remain on the page once the full GA release has been published. However I think it would be better to mostly keep the original wording, but tweaked to remove the ambiguity. > ? > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 8:32 PM Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> wrote: > >> I agree with Stian. It was discussed ~12-14 years ago, how to deal with >> "release for public consumption", "release for beta testers", "nightly >> builds" and so on. And AFAIR, the Stian's explanation mirrors the consensus >> from back then, and perhaps the wording is not optimal. >> >> Niclas >> >> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >> > Hang on, it's perfectly fine for ASF projects to publish and link to >> > milestone/alpha/beta releases - as long as they have also gone through >> > a formal release VOTE and checking, they are still "official >> > releases". >> > >> > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#release-types >> > >> > What is confusing about your quoted pagraph is that it uses the >> > terminology "not full official releases" misleadingly -- but those >> > should still be "official releases" - just not at a "stable" or >> > "general availability" maturity level. >> > >> > What is NOT ok is to link from the download page to a non-voted on >> > SNAPSHOT build or similar. That is quite clearly explained in >> > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html - but perhaps not on >> > release-download-pages.html. >> > >> > On 7 December 2016 at 12:31, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > > The following text is found on >> > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release-download-pages.html#links (4th >> bullet >> > in >> > > that section) >> > > >> > > Artifacts which are not full official releases (for example, >> milestones, >> > > betas and alphas) may be linked from the download page. Links to these >> > > artifacts should be removed in a timely fashion. >> > > >> > > I believe it's missing a "not" and should be >> > > >> > > Artifacts which are not full official releases (for example, >> milestones, >> > > betas and alphas) may not be linked from the download page. Links to >> > these >> > > artifacts should be removed in a timely fashion. >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Stian Soiland-Reyes >> > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718 >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer >> http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@community.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@community.apache.org
