+1 to Davor and JB's point. The incubator stuff can certainly be done thoroughly after the board's decision (if in favor). Graduation aside, keeping up the cadence of the release would be better in the product life cycle.
Perhaps a different thread altogether but I wanted to suggest if we can have sort of a window or timeline for feature/bug code freeze prior to release to ensure stability? On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Davor Bonaci <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd suggest to proceed with 0.4.0-incubating (as JB previously planned). > > My reasoning: I don't think we'll be able to release a non-incubating > release next week, regardless of the Board's graduation decision. I think > it will take a while (more details to follow on a separate thread). On the > other hand, 0.3.0-incubating has some important issues (e.g., template > projects don't work across runners, WordCount has issues on Windows OS). I > think it makes sense to fix these issues for our users, and have a better > product if/when the graduation announcement comes. > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 9:05 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Either way is fine for me too. > > > > We discussed about the release schedule independently from the graduation > > process, that's why 0.4.0-incubator was planned around today. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > > > On 12/13/2016 06:02 PM, Daniel Kulp wrote: > > > >> Hate to suggest this…. > >> > >> Assuming the Board OK’s the graduation next Wednesday, if we wait till > >> then to do the build, we can drop the the incubator stuff entirely and > it > >> could be a “first release” outside of incubation. We could avoid the > >> extra vote on the incubator list, etc…. > >> > >> Would it make sense to delay the week? Not a big deal either way, but > I > >> don’t think I’ve ever seen a project do a release between the graduation > >> vote and the board vote. Every project I’ve seen decided to wait to > have > >> the “we’ve graduated!” release. > >> > >> Dan > >> > >> > >> > >> On Dec 13, 2016, at 9:43 AM, Dan Halperin <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Update: we think we've knocked off all the 0.4.0-incubating blockers, > >>> including postponing some. JB is going to start the release process > soon! > >>> > >>> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected] > > > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Very good point Frances. > >>>> > >>>> Definitely something we have to do. > >>>> > >>>> Regards > >>>> JB > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 12/04/2016 07:38 AM, Frances Perry wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Sounds great, JB! > >>>>> > >>>>> The major blocker in my opinion is to finish the polishing pass on > the > >>>>> quickstarts and example archetypes, so that users will have a great > >>>>> experience trying out 0.4.0-incubating. I know we've made some > >>>>> significant > >>>>> progress there in the last few weeks, but I don't think we've quite > >>>>> finished. For example, https://issues.apache.org/ > jira/browse/BEAM-909 > >>>>> is > >>>>> unresolved and marked as 0.4.0-incubating. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 10:26 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > [email protected] > >>>>> > > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi beamers, > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We plan a 0.4.0-incubating release pretty soon. I propose to manage > >>>>>> this > >>>>>> release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I started to review the Jira with fix version set to > 0.4.0-incubating. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please, update the fix version in Jira if you are working on > specific > >>>>>> Jira > >>>>>> and you want to include in the 0.4.0-incubating release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>> Regards > >>>>>> JB > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >>>>>> [email protected] > >>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net > >>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net > >>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com > >>>> > >>>> > >> > > -- > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > [email protected] > > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > -- Neelesh Srinivas Salian Customer Operations Engineer
