On 13.10.2014 16:14, Julian Hyde wrote: > For many projects, especially "library" projects, the "convenient binaries" > that matter most these days are the jars (source, binary, and javadoc) that > are deployed to the maven repo. Calcite releases in fact do not currently > include a binary tar ball, only a source tar ball and maven jars. > > Are these jars subjected to due diligence during the release vote? It seems > to me that each of those jars is a de facto binary release.
If it contains sources, it's not a binary release. Binary JARs are definitely a binary release. I haven't a clue what Javadocs are, but since they're derived from the sources, I'd prefer to put them in the "binary" category for simplicity. But that's beside the point. "Convenience binaries" are anything that was created from the properly voted-on and released source that did not go through the same formal release proces as the source release. If the PMC did not vote on the binary JARs, they are not an Apache Release and therefore none of our guarantees (or liabilities) can apply to them. -- Brane --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
