sungwy commented on issue #739:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/issues/739#issuecomment-2543350809

   It looks like two issues have been resolved, and 
https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/pull/771 is very close to being merged.
   
   We'll get started with the release shortly! 🚀 
   
   > I believe we need something like 
https://github.com/apache/opendal/blob/main/scripts/release.py to help generate 
ASF source tarballs for core and python binding.
   
   Hi @Xuanwo - I started taking a look into this, and it looks like the 
existing [release.sh 
script](https://github.com/apache/iceberg-rust/blob/main/scripts/release.sh) 
would already create a tarball including all the source code for the core rust 
crates, as well as those of the python bindings.
   
   The opendal reference implementation creates different tarballs for each 
binding and integrations separately, all including the the source code of the 
rust core crates as well.
   
   Since we have 
[decided](https://lists.apache.org/thread/k71ls3pdf4x78r7q4x2np75tl74tsvdf) to 
have a single coupled release schedule for the rust core crates as well as the 
associated bindings, I'm wondering if it would just make sense to keep the 
source codes in the same tarball to simplify the process. We could also 
increment the version of pyiceberg_core library to 0.4.0 if that would make 
more sense for the tightly coupled release schedule.
   
   I looked up the [ASF release 
policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#source-packages), and 
I couldn't find any recommendations on how we should organize the source code 
for sub-distributions. I do see guidelines for how the source code needs to be 
uploaded and signed, and that the name of the packages will need to be prefixed 
by `apache` and the project name. I believe this will be the case whether we 
group the source code in a single tarball, or into separate ones.
   
   I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this suggestion @Xuanwo @Fokko and 
@liurenjie1024 do you think uploading the source package as a single artifact 
would make sense in our case?


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@iceberg.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@iceberg.apache.org

Reply via email to