>
> 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.

Reply via email to