> On Jul 3, 2019, at 12:24 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 12:17 PM Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> On Jul 3, 2019, at 11:50 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 10:28 AM Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi -
>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 1, 2019, at 1:30 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>>>>> <bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Jun 30, 2019 at 1:39 AM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> ...I put up suggested text changes for an incubator disclaimer here
>>>>>> [1]...
>>>>>
>>>>> Basically just adding this, right?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Some of the project releases may not follow ASF policy or have
>>>>>> incomplete or unknown licensing conditions....
>>>>>
>>>>> It works for me but I'd say "incubating project" to be clearer.
>>>>
>>>> How is this?
>>>>
>>>> “Some of the incubating project’s releases may not be fully compliant with
>>>> ASF policy. For example, releases may have incomplete or unreviewed
>>>> licensing conditions. Known issues will be described on the project’s
>>>> status page."
>>>
>>> I would suggest we have a policy where known issues are actually
>>> listed in the DISCLAIMER itself. Along the lines of:
>>>
>>> "Some of the incubating project’s releases may not be fully compliant
>>> with ASF policy. For example, releases may have incomplete or
>>> unreviewed licensing conditions. What follows is a list of known
>>> issues the project is currently aware of (note that this list, by
>>> definition, is likely to be incomplete):”
>>
>> -1.
>>
>> This only works for issues known before a release is cut. It does NOT WORK
>> if the issue is discovered during the release vote. Why? Because we are
>> trying to allow the release to go through without redoing it and this would
>> require reworking the release.
>>
>> I would rather do it outside of the release. Policing the actual DISCLAIMER
>> is not easily feasible and decreases the burden.
>>
>> If this is the decision then it leads to a choice that is worse than the
>> status quo.
>
> Nobody is suggesting the policing bit. What I'm suggesting is a
> central place for that information to be collated. Whether that
> becomes a showstopper for a release gets decided by the VOTE. But what
> I'm saying is that we shouldn't be in a position where we have to hunt
> for *known* and *acknowledged* issues all over the place (JIRA,
> mailing lists, wiki, website, etc.). Lets at least make sure we make
> our downstream consumer's life a bit easier.
My suggestion is that we put these onto our neglected status pages. I’m also
willing to work on enhancing the status page and process to make this easy for
Podlings to do.
Regards,
Dave
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
