Thanks for continuing to push releases forward! Unfortunately I won't be able to volunteer to be release manager this time around, but I'll try to set aside some time to go through some PRs.
On Sat, Oct 20, 2018, 02:21 Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > OK, it's now exactly 3 months since 1.17. I think it's time. I think > we should aim for a first RC a week from today (Friday 26th October). > > Can we have a volunteer to be release manager? > > Also, there are lots of PRs to review and merge. Please help out with > that task, committers. > > Julian > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:00 AM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > We’ll be sure to get PRs into the release. If you like, you can make the > JIRA case depend on those 3 cases - that will remind us. > > > > (Other contributors: You can do that also, but only if you have a PR > that you believe is ready to submit.) > > > > > On Sep 20, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Andrew Pilloud > <apill...@google.com.INVALID> wrote: > > > > > > Beam has a few JIRAs we'd like to see make the next release (which will > > > enable us to replace 11k lines of code with calls to Calcite). They all > > > have open PRs. > > > > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2404 Accessing > > > structured-types is not implemented by the runtime > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2529 linq4j should > promote > > > integer to floating point when generating function calls > > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2571 TRIM does not > match > > > the behavior of most SQL implementations > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 6:38 PM Kevin Risden <kris...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > >> 9/25 should be the GA release of JDK 11 according to [1]. Would be > good to > > >> ensure that the next release is compatible with it. We should be in > good > > >> shape but would be a good release note too. > > >> > > >> 1. http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/11/ > > >> > > >> Kevin Risden > > >> > > >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 20:56 Francis Chuang <francischu...@apache.org> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> For avatica, there are currently 6 open PRs. A few of them appear to > be > > >>> blocked due to incompatibilities with JDK or something else. Perhaps > the > > >>> situation has now changed and we can get those in for 1.13. > > >>> > > >>> On 20/09/2018 9:26 AM, Julian Hyde wrote: > > >>>> I have logged > > >>>> > > >>>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2576 < > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2576> Release Avatica > 1.13 > > >>>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2575 < > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2575> Release Calcite > > >> 1.18.0 > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>>> On Sep 19, 2018, at 4:19 PM, Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Calcite 1.17 was released on 20th July (2 months ago) and since > then > > >>> there have been almost 100 commits. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Does anyone have constraints on when 1.18 should be released? (My > > >>> opinion: we should aim for 3 months after 1.17, and therefore we will > > >> need > > >>> an RC before 10th October.) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Does anyone have any JIRA cases that they would like to get into > 1.18 > > >>> but they have not yet finished? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Who would like to be release manager? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Do we need a new Avatica release before we make this Calcite > release? > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2467 < > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2467> describes one > reason > > >>> to do so: jetty versions. Also, it would be nice if both projects > used > > >> the > > >>> new parent POM (see > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2486 < > > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2486>) but it’s not > > >>> essential. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Julian > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > >
