I think the vote (and discussions) about the use of extra distribution
channel is going in a bad direction.
I would like to try to summarize the two positions, see if we could
not reconcile the two positions and found a better consensus.
Here is what the 2 camps say:
+1 : say:
- We can not forbid the incubator artefact to be published in the
maven repository. Once an incubating release is done, anyone is free
to redistribute it.
- It bring benefits for the incubating project (more users, more
visibility)
-1 say:
- It allow the user to ignore the disclaimer.
- It is useless. There is work around.
- We want to put obstacles to incubating project in order to motivate
them to graduate.
- We should not take decision on it without consensus, so -1 is better.
- The maven repository present some security issues
I think the main reason of the -1 is to protect the name of Apache.
The incubating project are not allowed to have an excessive
fascination for the apache brand [1]. The incubating project should
not abuse the Apache brand. That's why the incubator distributions
are done only on channel well controlled by the ASF.
I think both arguments are valuable. And it is maybe possible to
reconciliation them.
The alternative proposition that I think could reconciliate both camp is:
Why not allow the incubating project to release to any channel they
want, provided that they don't use the apache name.
PS: Please, don't discuss the specific case of the maven repository.
Start an other thread somewhere else if you want to discuss it.
--
Gilles Scokart
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
