On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 12:27 PM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > > This sentence is very confusing to me. If the release is "unofficial” > then it can't be subject to ASF's policy, no? > > I used the word unofficial as some of these artefacts are connivance > binaries. I and don’t want to open up the “we only release source" can of > worms. > Then why not just call them what they are "convenience binary artifacts". IOW, how about this edit: - Convenience binary artifact releases need to be made from approved voted on approved ASF releases. ? > > > I am actually not sure why we're including GitHub in this list. > > Because people are placing releases there as well. Github has a release > page which can include release notes etc and shows a history of releases, > users can download releases from here. > Wait, you mean binary releases, not just source code tags? > > > It is unclear whether <project> should include incubator- prefix. I > > honestly thing it should. > > Good point. None of them I’ve seen have, I was thinking not and then you > need to rename on graduation which would be a pain. > > > You don't have to had a Dockerfile to publish to Docker Hub. This > sentence > > makes it sound like it is a requirement. > > Right I’ll make that optional. > > Thanks for the feedback. > Justin
