Quarterly seems fine. Still too many branches though.
Any chance of your going to 1.4 Francis so we can let Andrew's effort at unhitching 1.3 complete? Thanks, S On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:32 AM Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: > I have been releasing 1.4 semi-monthly (usually, monthly) and Sean has been > releasing 1.2 every quarter. So maybe quarterly releases would be good? > What do others think? What is the minimum release schedule to make it worth > your while for commits/backports to a branch? At least once every half > year? More often? > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:23 AM Francis Christopher Liu < > toffer....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Given there was no release activity on 1.3 all year may I ask how you > are > > using 1.3? Are you consuming upstream changes by cherry pick into an > > internal branch? > > It depends on the urgency of an internal release we either pull in all > > changes up to a release, tip or cherry-pick. For the more recent releases > > we've been cherry picking. Tho we intend to pull in all changes again. > BTW > > I did release 1.3.2 in March. > > > > >It’s great that you’ve stepped forward to offer ongoing RM activity. We > > will need this commitment and a new pattern of more frequent releasing to > > justify keeping the code line alive, I think. > > Let me know what would be an acceptable release cadence and I'll carve > out > > time. > > > > >Did you see that I stepped forward to make a release? There is a VOTE > > thread now for 1.3.3RC0. Perhaps we can start there? Would you use it? > > Would you +1? Or are there changes in there that are of concern? Please > > consider commenting on the VOTE. > > Yes we will use it, my intention is to be as current to branch-1.3 as > > possible. Yes, I intend to vote on the release. I am currently running > the > > unit test and going through the release. Apologies for you having to cut > > the release. > > > > Thanks, > > Francis > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:48 AM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > It’s been a year since the last release. For what it’s worth I see no > > harm > > > in continuing to release 1.3, but you have to consider how burdensome > it > > is > > > to have an open code line that bug fixes need to be committed into. > Given > > > there was no release activity on 1.3 all year may I ask how you are > using > > > 1.3? Are you consuming upstream changes by cherry pick into an internal > > > branch? Or are you not consuming any upstream changes at all? If the > > > latter, then what’s the point? If the former, it still isn’t great, > > because > > > while changes may be getting out into production somewhere it’s only > you > > > who is benefitting. We need releases from branch-1.3 a lot more > > frequently > > > or it’s a bad deal for the community. Committers have to deal with > > > effectively a dead branch. Users get no releases. Given the consensus > > > expressed on this thread we don’t want this deal. It’s great that > you’ve > > > stepped forward to offer ongoing RM activity. We will need this > > commitment > > > and a new pattern of more frequent releasing to justify keeping the > code > > > line alive, I think. > > > > > > Did you see that I stepped forward to make a release? There is a VOTE > > > thread now for 1.3.3RC0. Perhaps we can start there? Would you use it? > > > Would you +1? Or are there changes in there that are of concern? Please > > > consider commenting on the VOTE. > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 17, 2018, at 8:31 AM, Francis Christopher Liu < > > > toffer....@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Apologies a bit late to this discussion. I would still like to > continue > > > > making 1.3 releases. If the concern is having a better cadence of > > > releases > > > > let me know how often the community would like (quarterly, every > other > > > > month, etc) and I'll make sure to carve out time with my employer. We > > > will > > > > be on 1.3 for a while. I believe it would be beneficial for the > > community > > > > and my employer for us to be on an active release line, hence my > > > interest. > > > > > > > > Let me know what you guys think? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Francis > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 6:04 PM Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Thank you all for your comments. It looks like we have consensus to > > EOL > > > 1.3 > > > >> and RM one final release. I will start working on that release, > 1.3.3, > > > now. > > > >> > > > >>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 8:50 AM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> +1 > > > >>> > > > >>>> On 12/7/18 2:24 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > > >>>> We haven't had a release from branch-1.3 for a long time and do > not > > > >>> appear > > > >>>> to have an active RM for it. Unless a RM for 1.3 steps forward and > > > >>> promises > > > >>>> to make a release in the very near future, I propose we make one > > more > > > >>>> release of 1.3, from the head of branch-1.3, and then retire the > > > >> branch. > > > >>> If > > > >>>> this is acceptable I can RM the final 1.3 release. > > > >>>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> Best regards, > > > >> Andrew > > > >> > > > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from > truth's > > > >> decrepit hands > > > >> - A23, Crosstalk > > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Andrew > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > decrepit hands > - A23, Crosstalk >
