Re: [MENTORS] Potential issue with GitHub releases
Dave Fisher <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.apache.incubator.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> On May 4, 2026, at 8:15 AM, Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > Damn, > > It seems that no matter what we do - "source" links will always appear > there (after some time :X). But then, we do not have to upload "our" > packages there. > > This is what I proposed to the Airflow PMC. Perhaps we can take it as an > example of how it can be "clearly" marked? (you can see it in my Airflow > fork) [1]: > > The only authoritative source for Apache Airflow 3.2.1 release > artifacts is the official downloads page at: > > https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/3.2.1/installation/installing-from-sources.html > That page lists the source tarballs, wheels, detached .asc signatures, > and .sha512 checksums published by the ASF, with instructions for > verifying each — including the project's signing keys at > https://downloads.apache.org/airflow/KEYS. > > Note: the "Source code (zip)" and "Source code (tar.gz)" attachments > on this page are GitHub-generated snapshots of the git tag. They are > not official ASF releases, are not signed, and may differ > from the canonical artifacts on the downloads page above. I would remove “may” since these will differ almost always. Best, Dave > > [1] > https://github.com/potiuk/airflow/releases/tag/release-rendering-test-3.2.1 > - > > > On Sun, May 3, 2026 at 10:37 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> And sorry for getting your name wrong - autocorrect can be the worse >> sometimes >> No problem, it happens to me all the time, Josef ;) >> >> Regarding GitHub releases, I’ve confirmed it is possible to maintain >> release pages containing only release notes without attached binaries. >> Airflow is currently running a lazy consensus [1] to remove binaries from >> GitHub and instead provide links to our official download page [2] and >> PyPI. We will include a note that our PyPI packages are bit-to-bit >> identical to the SVN artifacts and have passed all required checks and >> votes. >> >> I believe this is the best approach because it maintains the familiarity >> of GitHub release notes for users while eliminating concerns regarding >> artifact immutability or multiple "sources of truth." You can see a preview >> of the throwaway script to do in this PR [3] and a live example on my >> private fork [4]. >> >> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/5x55mvorsrkc4ny16v55d71bbs9djm6y >> [2] https://infra.apache.org/release-download-pages.html >> [3] https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/66314 >> [4] >> https://github.com/potiuk/airflow/releases/tag/release-rendering-test-3.2.1 >> >> Thanks, >> Jarek >> >> On Sun, May 3, 2026 at 6:59 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Justin, >>> >>> I will check but I guess it's the "default" GH Release. Let me check on >>> the >>> podliings I mentor. >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On Sat, May 2, 2026 at 12:10 PM Justin Mclean <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I also checked current podlings against the Incubator GitHub >>> distribution >>>> guidance: >>>> https://incubator.apache.org/guides/distribution.html#github >>>> >>>> The following podlings appear to have GitHub Releases that may need >>>> cleanup/extra info added: >>>> - Burr >>>> - Casbin >>>> - Fluss >>>> - GraphAr >>>> - Hamilton >>>> - Iggy >>>> - OzHera >>>> - ResilientDB >>>> >>>> Again, this was done with a script and could be incomplete or incorrect. >>>> >>>> Could mentors and PPMCs please check that GitHub Releases include the >>>> incubating disclaimer where needed, and that RCs, nightlies, and >>> snapshots >>>> etc are marked as GitHub pre-releases? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Justin >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>> >>