If the consensus is that meaningful community testing will occur in the week between "beta1 but SAI is broken, friends" and "ok, beta2, it's fixed now, go for it"...then go for it.
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:40 PM Patrick McFadin <pmcfa...@gmail.com> wrote: > JD, that wasn't my point. It feels like we are treating a beta like an RC, > which it isn't. Ship Beta 1 now and Beta 2 later. We need people looking > today because they will find new bugs and the signal is lost on alpha. It's > too yolo for most people. > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 10:36 AM Benjamin Lerer <b.le...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> -1 based on the problems raised by Caleb. >> >> I would be fine with releasing that version as an alpha as Jeremiah >> proposed. >> >> As of this time, I'm also not aware of a user of the project operating a >>> build from the 5.0 branch at substantial scale to suss out the operational >>> side of what can be expected. If someone is running a build supporting >>> non-perf-test traffic derived from the 5.0 branch and has an experience >>> report to share it would be great to read. >> >> >> Some people at Datastax are working on such testing. It will take a bit >> of time before we get the final results though. >> >> Le mar. 28 nov. 2023 à 19:27, J. D. Jordan <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> a >> écrit : >> >>> That said. This is clearly better than and with many fixes from the >>> alpha. Would people be more comfortable if this cut was released as another >>> alpha and we do beta1 once the known fixes land? >>> >>> On Nov 28, 2023, at 12:21 PM, J. D. Jordan <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> -0 (NB) on this cut. Given the concerns expressed so far in the thread I >>> would think we should re-cut beta1 at the end of the week. >>> >>> On Nov 28, 2023, at 12:06 PM, Patrick McFadin <pmcfa...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> I'm a +1 on a beta now vs maybe later. Beta doesn't imply perfect >>> especially if there are declared known issues. We need people outside of >>> this tight group using it and finding issues. I know how this rolls. Very >>> few people touch a Alpha release. Beta is when the engine starts and we >>> need to get it started asap. Otherwise we are telling ourselves we have the >>> perfect testing apparatus and don't need more users testing. I don't think >>> that is the case. >>> >>> Scott, Ekaterina, and I are going to be on stage in 2 weeks talking >>> about Cassandra 5 in the keynotes. In that time, our call to action is >>> going to be to test the beta. >>> >>> Patrick >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 9:41 AM Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed). Everyone who has >>>>> tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members are considered >>>>> binding. A vote passes if there are at least three binding +1s and no >>>>> -1's. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> Checked >>>> - signing correct >>>> - checksums are correct >>>> - source artefact builds (JDK 11+17) >>>> - binary artefact runs (JDK 11+17) >>>> - debian package runs (JDK 11+17) >>>> - debian repo runs (JDK 11+17) >>>> - redhat* package runs (JDK11+17) >>>> - redhat* repo runs (JDK 11+17) >>>> >>>> >>>> With the disclaimer: There's a few known bugs in SAI, e.g. 19011, with >>>> fixes to be available soon in 5.0-beta2. >>>> >>>> >>>>
