The answer will depend on how conservative you are. The most conservative choice overall would be to go with the 2.2.x line.
3.0.x if you want to the new nice and shiny 3.0 things, but can tolerate some risk (the branch has a lot of relatively new core code, and hasn’t yet been tried out by as many users as the 2.x branch had). The latest odd 3.x if you want the shiniest (3.5 to be released soon, with features like the new SASI secondary indexes support). Also, there hasn’t yet been that much divergence between 3.0.x and 3.x, so risk levels are around the same, so long as you limit yourself to only the features present in 3.0.x. Either way, make sure to properly test whatever release you go for in staging first, as Michael says, and you’ll be alright. -- AY On 11 April 2016 at 18:42:31, Anuj Wadehra (anujw_2...@yahoo.co.in.invalid) wrote: Can someone help me with this one? ThanksAnuj Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Sun, 10 Apr, 2016 at 11:07 PM, Anuj Wadehra<anujw_2...@yahoo.co.in> wrote: Hi, Tick-Tock release strategy in 3.x was a good intiative to ensure frequent & stable releases. While odd releases are supposed to get all the bug fixes and should be most stable, many people like me, who got used to the comforting "production ready/stable" tag on Apache website, are still reluctant to take latest 3.x odd releases into production. I think the hesitation is somewhat justified as processes often take time to mature. So here I would like to ask the experts, people who know the ground situation, people who actively develop it and manage it. Considering the current scenario, What should be a resonable criteria for taking 3.x releases in production? ThanksAnuj
