Hi All, Thank you for all the feedback and responses.
Regarding the open tickets, I had something similar to Mike's idea in mind: we review the tickets and if there's nothing blocking a release, we reschedule the unresolved ones for 1.8 or so. I agree that we should have more frequent releases. Aiming for something quarterly sounds like a good thing. Thank you, Donat On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Saikat Kanjilal <sxk1...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I'd be willing to help, I've been heads down on other stuff and have had to > postpone the graph sink implementation > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLUME-2035) but am looking to resume > work and targeting an initial implementation by mid November sometime. In > the meantime let me know how I can get more deeply involved in the next > release. > > > Regards > > > ________________________________ > From: Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 10:15 AM > To: dev@flume.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Flume 1.7 release plan > > FWIW, missing the train wouldn't be that big a deal if you knew the next > release wouldn't be too far out. A release a quarter would be a nice target. > > Ralph > >> On Sep 30, 2016, at 8:36 AM, Mike Percy <mpe...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Denes Arvay <de...@cloudera.com> wrote: >> >>> What are your plans regarding to the mentioned 18 issues in patch available >>> state? Should we decide on a one-by-one basis whether we'd like to include >>> in the release or should we reschedule all of them to a next release? >>> >> >> I'd personally recommend committing whatever is ready and reasonably >> low-risk, and whatever doesn't make the deadline should "miss the train" >> unless it's a particularly critical issue. This approach has worked well >> for me in the past. >> >> Best, >> Mike > >
