+1 for 2.x branches and tags for 2.x.y releases. Also, I think we should integrate the dependency upgrade https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-6552 to 2.7.1 which fixes a rare but critical bug.
Thanks, Cham On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:17 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com> wrote: > It makes sense to me that 2.7 is a branch and just tags for 2.7.0, 2.7.1, > etc. > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:43 AM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > >> How about naming the branches release-X.Y and use them as base for all >> the X.Y.Z releases? We already have the X.Y.Z tags to refer to the actual >> release. >> >> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:23 AM Charles Chen <c...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> I would be in favor of keeping the old 2.7.0 release branch / tag static >>> so that referring to it will always get the right 2.7.0 code. >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 10:24 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I have waffled on whether to have release-2.7 and only branch >>>> release-2.7.1 when starting that release. I think that whenever we release >>>> 2.7.n the branch for 2.7.(n+1) should start from exactly that point, no? Or >>>> perhaps on release-2.7 branch the hardcoded version strings could be >>>> 2.7.1-SNAPSHOT/dev and remove the SNAPSHOT/dev when cutting the new release >>>> branch? I guess I think either one is fine. I think starting the branch now >>>> is smart, so that you can accumulate cherrypicks of backports. >>>> >>>> Kenn >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 7:55 AM Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 2.10.0 will be done when its done. Same goes for 2.7.1, which is >>>>> likely going to >>>>> be done later since we are focusing on 2.10.0 at the moment. >>>>> >>>>> I've created the release-2.7.1 branch because there is no other place >>>>> for fixes >>>>> of future versions. It would be helpful to have a minor version branch >>>>> (e.g. >>>>> release-2.7) which can be continuously updated. >>>>> >>>>> More generally speaking, we should dedicate time for LTS releases. >>>>> What is the >>>>> point otherwise of having an LTS version? >>>>> >>>>> -Max >>>>> >>>>> On 31.01.19 16:28, Thomas Weise wrote: >>>>> > Since you were originally thinking of 2.9.x as target, 2.10.0 seems >>>>> closer both >>>>> > in time and upgrade path. >>>>> > >>>>> > I see no reason why a 2.7.1 release would materialize any sooner >>>>> than 2.10.0. >>>>> > >>>>> > Or is the intention is to just stack up fixes in the 2.7.x branch >>>>> for a >>>>> > potential future release? >>>>> > >>>>> > Thomas >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:03 AM Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org >>>>> > <mailto:m...@apache.org>> wrote: >>>>> > >>>>> > I agree it's better to take some extra time to ensure the >>>>> quality of 2.10.0. >>>>> > >>>>> > I've created a 2.7.1 branch and cherry-picked the relevant >>>>> commits[1]. We could >>>>> > start collecting other fixes in case there are any. >>>>> > >>>>> > -Max >>>>> > >>>>> > [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/7687 >>>>> > >>>>> > On 30.01.19 20:57, Kenneth Knowles wrote: >>>>> > > Sounds good to me to target 2.7.1 and 2.10.0. I will have to >>>>> re-roll RC2 >>>>> > after >>>>> > > confirming fixes for the latest blockers that were found. >>>>> These are not >>>>> > > regressions from 2.9.0. But they seem severe enough that they >>>>> are worth >>>>> > taking >>>>> > > an extra day or two, because 2.9.0 had enough problems that I >>>>> would like >>>>> > to make >>>>> > > 2.10.0 a more attractive upgrade target for users still on >>>>> very old versions. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Kenn >>>>> > > >>>>> > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:22 AM Maximilian Michels < >>>>> m...@apache.org >>>>> > <mailto:m...@apache.org> >>>>> > > <mailto:m...@apache.org <mailto:m...@apache.org>>> wrote: >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Hi everyone, >>>>> > > >>>>> > > I know we are in the midst of releasing 2.10.0, but with >>>>> the release >>>>> > process >>>>> > > taking its time I consider creating a patch release for >>>>> this issue in the >>>>> > > FlinkRunner: >>>>> https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-5386 >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Initially I thought it would be good to do a 2.9.1 >>>>> release, but since we >>>>> > > have an >>>>> > > LTS version, we should probably do a 2.7.1 (LTS) release >>>>> instead. >>>>> > > >>>>> > > What do you think? I could only find one Fix Version >>>>> 2.7.1 issue in JIRA: >>>>> > > >>>>> > >>>>> https://jira.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.7.1 >>>>> > > >>>>> > > Best, >>>>> > > Max >>>>> > > >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>
