On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 02:13:49PM -0500, Rob Weir wrote: > >>>> Any opinions, concerns or feedback? Follow up discussion should take > >>>> place on the dev list only (the list where decisions are made). > >>> > >>> It may be a good idea to build all languages, or at least those with 80% > >>> of the UI translated, but release only those with 100%; we could leave > >>> the rest in people.apache.org as unofficial builds (at least langpacks), > >>> and point people to them instead of you-know-what http://s.apache.org/yY > >> > >> We can't do that. We either release or we don't release a language. > >> If we're not releasing it then we should not be pointing users to it > >> on people.apache.org. This is an issue both from Apache release > >> policy and Infra policy (bandwidth issues). > > > > Change people.apache.org for apache-extras or any other place. The idea > > is having all language packs built, not advertising them on our website > > (that said, note that the dev. snapshots hosted on people.apache.org are > > advertised on the main download page ;) ). And the goal is to point them > > to user when they ask, or list them on the porting page, or using them > > for ongoing translation efforts, etc. > > > > > If we want something to be downloaded and used by the public then we > should release it, period. We should not be looking for clever ways > to avoid the important release steps of verifying IP, producing a > source package and voting on it.
It seems you are mixing things, as I only proposed to build all language packages, while following the same release criteria as before (release only languages with 100% UI and a localization team backing it). Where do you see a clever way to avoid official procedures in this? In the end, it's just the same as I've done with the linux glib-2.5 build, which is advertised in the portings page, and stored at people.apache.org... I haven't heard any complaints about this, so far only some people thankful https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119385#c13 If I have the time, and the will to do so with the language packs, there is nothing that prevents me for doing so. > This is what it means to be an Apache project. Regards -- Ariel Constenla-Haile La Plata, Argentina
pgpg8Tt8tWaBg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
