+1 on EOL.
------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------
发件人:
"user"
<[email protected]>;
发送时间: 2021年4月1日(星期四) 晚上9:24
收件人: "HBase Dev List"<[email protected]>;
抄送: "hbase-user"<[email protected]>;
主题: Re: EOL branch-1 and all 1.x ?
+1 on EOL.
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 7:32 AM Viraj Jasani <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 to EOL'ing branch-1 and all other branch-1.x too (if they are still
> active at all)
>
>
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 8:53 AM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > EOL of branch-1 doesn’t mean we take down the 1.6.0 release. It would
be
> > fine to leave that in place. That can be a separate, future,
discussion,
> > although if branch-1 becomes EOL its eventual removal would be
certain.
> The
> > question is really if we plan to maintain branch-1 going forward.
Based
> on
> > lack of interest and demand in releasing it, there does not seem
reason
> to.
> >
> >
> > > On Mar 31, 2021, at 7:51 PM, Reid Chan
<[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > My only concern is about the performance, once in a while
there'll be
> > > some emails like "2.x.y is slower than 1.x.y".
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:03 AM Andrew Purtell
<[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Is it time to consider EOL of branch-1 and all 1.x releases ?
> > >>
> > >> There doesn't seem to be much developer interest in branch-1
beyond
> > >> occasional maintenance. This is understandable. Per our
compatibility
> > >> guidelines, branch-1 commits must be compatible with Java 7,
and the
> > range
> > >> of acceptable versions of third party dependencies is also
restricted
> > due
> > >> to Java 7 compatibility requirements. Most developers are
writing code
> > with
> > >> Java 8+ idioms these days. For that reason and because the
branch-1
> code
> > >> base is generally aged at this point, all but trivial (or
lucky!)
> > backports
> > >> require substantial changes in order to integrate
adequately. Let me
> > also
> > >> observe that branch-1 artifacts are not fully compatible
with Java 11
> or
> > >> later. (The shell is a good example of such issues: The
version of
> > >> jruby-complete required by branch-1 is not compatible with
Java 11 and
> > >> upgrading to the version used by branch-2 causes shell
commands to
> error
> > >> out due to Ruby language changes.)
> > >>
> > >> We can a priori determine there is insufficient motivation
for
> > production
> > >> of release artifacts for the PMC to vote upon. Otherwise,
someone
> would
> > >> have done it. We had 12 releases from branch-2 derived code
in 2019,
> 13
> > >> releases from branch-2 derived code in 2020, and so far we
have had 3
> > >> releases from branch-2 derived code in 2021. In contrast, we
had 8
> > releases
> > >> from branch-1 derived code in 2019, 0 releases from branch-1
in 2020,
> > and
> > >> so far 0 releases from branch-1 in 2021.
> > >>
> > >> * 2021202020191.x0282.x31312*
> > >>
> > >> If there is someone interested in continuing branch-1, now
is the time
> > to
> > >> commit. However let me be clear that simply expressing an
abstract
> > desire
> > >> to see continued branch-1 releases will not be that useful.
It will be
> > >> noted, but will not have much real world impact. Apache is a
> do-ocracy.
> > In
> > >> the absence of intrinsic motivation of project participants,
which is
> > what
> > >> we seem to have here, you will need to do something: Fix the
> > compatibility
> > >> issues, if any between the last release of 1.x and the
current
> branch-1
> > >> head; fix any failing and flaky unit tests; produce release
artifacts;
> > and
> > >> submit those artifacts to the PMC for voting. Or, convince
someone
> with
> > >> commit rights and/or PMC membership to undertake these
actions on your
> > >> behalf.
> > >>
> > >> Otherwise, I respectfully submit for your consideration, it
is time to
> > >> declare branch-1 and all 1.x code lines EOL, simply
acknowledging
> what
> > has
> > >> effectively already happened.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Andrew
> > >>
> > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn
from truth's
> > >> decrepit hands
> > >> - A23, Crosstalk
> > >>
> >
>
