Sorry, I did find your email which I have seemingly missed with: > To summarise, we need to make 4.2 into 5.0, as > - we need to remove (the already deprecated) JavaScript UDFs to add JDK 17, > - dropping support for JDK8 would make it impossible to upgrade from 3.x (see > explanation below), > - CEP-21 (once accepted) will be easier without having to support 3.x > compatibility. It is also my understanding that CEP-15 requires CEP-21.
At least from my perspective, I would not bump the version just because of UDFs and JDK 8. On Mon, Oct 17, 2022, at 4:08 PM, Alex Petrov wrote: > Could you be more explicit? Are you saying we should release 5.0 instead of > 4.2 (which I'm assuming you're advocating for), or are you saying we should > release 4.2? > > I still do not understand the question, really. It can't be more important to > be consistent with versioning than for versions to mean what we want them to > communicate, but we can do well on both fronts without much additional effort. > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022, at 3:55 PM, Mick Semb Wever wrote: >> >> >>> I'm also a bit confused by the original question: if there's a proposal to >>> release 4.2 as 5.0, let's hear out why and just vote for it (list reasons, >>> and let everyone express their opinions about why this does or does not >>> warrant the version bump). If there are no reasons for us to do, I'm not >>> sure why this is important. >> >> >> Consistency. To the benefit of operators. >> >> I totally get from our PoV there's no problem with this being arbitrary. But >> from experience witnessing the uncertainty and pain operators go through, >> this "decide it each time" is not simplifying it for anyone. >> >
