On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 7:33 PM Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > > I don't know the answers to these questions. I just want to put a > stake in the ground before the Accumulo Summit, so we have a basis for
I am in favor of trying to do an alpha release and completing the release notes before the summit. I can help with the release notes, it may be at the 11th hour though. > evaluation and testing, and answering some of these unknowns. > On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 11:28 AM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > I would like to know what the scope of 2.0 is. Specifically: > > > > * What's new in this 2.0 alpha that people that is driving the release? > > * Is there anything else expected to land post-alpha/pre-GA? > > > > On 10/6/18 1:36 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > > > yes alphas please. Do we want to talk about expectations on time > > > between alpha releases? What kind of criteria for beta or GA? > > > > > > a *lot* has changed in the 2.0 codebase. > > > On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 11:45 AM Ed Coleman <d...@etcoleman.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> +1 > > >> > > >> In addition to the reasons stated by Christopher, I think that it also > > >> provides a clearer signal to earlier adopters that the public API *may* > > >> change before the formal release. With a formal release candidate, I > > >> interpret that it signals that only bug-fixes would occur up and until > > >> the formal release. > > >> > > >> With the length of time that we take between minor and patch releases, > > >> the even longer time that it takes the customer base to upgrade and > > >> development cost that we have supporting multiple branches, taking some > > >> extra time now to solicit feedback seems prudent. While the specifics > > >> and implications of semver are clear, sometimes it seems that there is > > >> additional weight and additional perceived risk when changing major > > >> versions, an alpha version preserves our flexibility while still moving > > >> forward. > > >> > > >> Ed Coleman > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] > > >> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2018 12:28 AM > > >> To: accumulo-dev <dev@accumulo.apache.org> > > >> Subject: [DISCUSS] 2.0.0-alpha? > > >> > > >> Hi Accumulo devs, > > >> > > >> I'm thinking about initiating a vote next week for a 2.0.0-alpha > > >> release, so we can have an official ASF release (albeit without the > > >> usual stability expectations as a normal release) to be available for > > >> the upcoming Accumulo Summit. > > >> > > >> An alpha version would signal our progress towards 2.0.0 final, serve as > > >> a basis for testing, and give us something to share with a wider > > >> audience to solicit feedback on the API, configuration, and module > > >> changes. Of course, it would still have to meet ASF release > > >> requirements... like licensing and stuff, and it should essentially work > > >> (so people can actually run tests), but in an alpha release, we could > > >> tolerate flaws we wouldn't in a final release. > > >> > > >> Ideally, I would have preferred a 2.0.0 final at this point in the year, > > >> but I think it needs more testing. > > >> > > >> Does an alpha release next week seem reasonable to you? > > >> > > >> Christopher > > >> > > > > > >
