| Re: [adoptium-wg] Adoptium Marketplace Policy |
| Some notes/comments: 1. "Inclusion in the marketplace is open to all members at no cost to the provider" contradicts the later "Provide evidence that the producer is a Strategic or Enterprise member of the Adoptium Working Group". Assuming the latter is correct, should amend the former. 2. Marketplace mechanics question/discussion: [TDLR: I think the marketplace shoudl list download pages and not binaries, and that we need to push download page management contenst to the individual distros] We need to determine if the marketplace will a) list specific immutable versions of products (via e.g. links to specific binaries) or b) lists product locations that *only* include specific immutable versions of binaries that meet the marketplace criteria. While (a) [which is what is currently described, I think], seemingly keeps the question of "how do we know a location *only* includes binaries that meet the marketplace criteria, I believe that it is logistically problematic for multipel reasons: 1. Publication of new binaries: each distro will e.g. need to publish 10s or 100s of new binaries each quarter), and access to of those new binaries needs to urgently occur once the binaries are first made publicly visible. It will take us time (probably beyind what we have) to create a working mechanism that wouild allow marketplace members to "feed" the markletplace with the information needed to auto-populate the marketplace entries with no little human intervention. 2. The complexity of the marketplace contents, and the need to present it and navigate through it:
- Providing a marketplace browsing mechanism that would navigate all of these using a common structure, options/columns, terminology, etc. (or ones that would adjust for each distro's vriant use of these things) will likely be challenging. While some common denominator may be constructable over time, we likely don't have the time to get to one before we want our first MVP marketplace to be up and running. I therefore believe that (b) above is the more likely path for a succesful MVP marketplace in the near term. This (b) option would involve "trusting" the places that links in the marketplace point to (e.g. a link to a place where you can get marketplace-criteria-meeting binaries of VendorX Java SE 11 builds) to "only include" only binaries that meet the marketplace criteria. We'd need to define what "only include" means in a way that is reasonable, easy to meet, and fits with or enables the real-world behaviors for download pages of various distros. E.g. it is clear that we would want such a place to not mix marketplace-criteria-meeting binaries with ones that are not (e.g. EA builds, daily non-TCK-tested builds, non-AQAvit-certified builds) in a common list. But we would probably be fine with the "place" being part of or having links to other locations or sites as long as those links do not imply that those are part of the matkletplace contents. IMO setting a [policy for what an acceptable "Eclipse Adpotium Marketplace download page" would be, and allowing marketplace members to edit those pages as needed, under their control, would be the most practical way to provide a good marketplace in the near term. Distros would be responsible for maintaining a separate location for such a download page (with the contents at that location meeting the criteria and policies), but will be able to add and remove binaries as needed, and edit and update the page as needed. If a distro's page somehow evolves to be "non-compliant" with adoptium marketplace policies, we can work with the distro to correct that non-compliance ASAP, as an after-the-fact action. Distros that repeatedly or insistently violate the polices can be "dealt with" after the fact, but we will hopefully/presumably not need to deal with that distiuation at all (or at least extremely rarely). — Gil.
|
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP