I would suggest to do quarterly releases (eg: every 3 months), since that seems to me a good tradeoff ratio between planning and agility of shipping new features/improvements.
Matteo On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 4:36 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > Il ven 11 ago 2017, 13:10 Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > > > Folks, please take a look at this. We need to decide the schedule for > > 4.6.0. > > > > Maybe we can take 4.3 clients as compatible baseline for 4.6. > > What is the next step? > Shiuld you call a vote ? > > Enrico > > > > - Sijie > > > > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > First thanks everyone who contributed to 4.5.0 in the past year, and > > > especially thanks JV for spending time doing the release. The first > > release > > > candidate of 4.5.0 is finally out of review now. We are almost there. > > > > > > We eventually merge the major features from 3 main folked branches > > > (Salesforce, Twitter and Yahoo), so that we can converge to one main > open > > > source branch across different organizations. We added a lot of > features, > > > bug fixes and improvements. We moved to github to make contribution > > easier > > > and friendly and we have new website with more documentation. There are > > > tons of works we did very well in 4.5.0. > > > > > > However, I think the release has taken too long to complete. It causes > a > > > lot of inconsistencies between code, configuration and documentation. > > This > > > causes most of the contributions were spent on improving documentation > at > > > the end of the release. And also people can't really follow what's > > > happening in a long-cycle release and they eventually left. > > > > > > I am thinking of changing the release plan/schedule to a more > time-based > > > mechanism what other projects (like Kafka, Flink) are doing: > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Time+Based+Release+Plan > > > Some of the benefits are documented in their wikis (also copied them in > > > the email for easy to read). > > > > > > Any thoughts? Shall we try to adopt this method? > > > > > > > > > 1. > > > > > > A quicker feedback cycle and users can benefit from features shipped > > > quicker > > > 2. > > > > > > Predictability for contributors and users: > > > 1. > > > > > > Developers and reviewers can decide in advance what release they > > > are aiming for with specific features. > > > 2. > > > > > > If a feature misses a release we have a good idea of when it will > > > show up. > > > 3. > > > > > > Users know when to expect their features > > > 3. > > > > > > Transparency - There will be a published cut-off date (AKA feature > > > freeze) for the release and people will know about it in advance. > > Hopefully > > > this will remove the contention around which features make it. > > > 4. > > > > > > Quality - we've seen issues pop up in release candidates due to > > > last-minute features that didn't have proper time to bake in. More > > time > > > between feature freeze and release will let us test more, document > > more and > > > resolve more issues. > > > > > > > > > - Sijie > > > > > > -- > > > -- Enrico Olivelli > -- Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org>
