> > I concede it would be fine to do it gradually. Once the pace of issues > introduced by new development is beaten by the pace at which they are > addressed I think things will go well.
So from Michael's JIRA query: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12617?jql=project%20%3D%20CASSANDRA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.10%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved Are we good for 3.10 after we get those cleaned up? Ariel, you made reference to: https://github.com/apache/cassandra/commit/c612cd8d7dbd24888c216ad53f974686b88dd601 Do we need to re-open an issue to have this applied to 3.10 and add it to the above list? > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017, at 11:17 AM, Josh McKenzie wrote: >> >> Sankalp's proposal of us progressively tightening up our standards allows >> us to get code out the door and regain some lost momentum on the 3.10 >> release failures and blocking, and gives us time as a community to adjust >> our behavior without the burden of an ever-later slipped release hanging >> over our heads. There's plenty of bugfixes in the 3.X line; the more time >> people can have to kick the tires on that code, the more things we can >> find >> and the better future releases will be. +1 On gradually moving to this. Dropping releases with huge change lists has never gone well for us in the past.
