Thank you for your input, Duo. I agree that the longevity of the 2.x release support is a crucial factor in deciding our approach.
Even I think Istvan is in favor of single branch strategy for now, including me, for maintenance concerns. As you already mentioned, we can revisit the branching strategy once the adoption of 3.x becomes more widespread and the activity around 2.x decreases. I will wait for others' input, if any, for the next few hours. If there are no further objections, I will initiate the hbase-thirdparty 4.1.11 release process later tonight (IST). Regards, Nihal On 2025/05/23 07:48:48 "张铎(Duo Zhang)" wrote: > After consideration, I think maybe the key thing here is how long we > still plan to support frequent 2.x releases. > > So I think we could go with one branch for now, and once 3.x becomes a > more popular release and 2.x gets less active, we can go with the two > branches solution. > > Thanks. > > Nihal Jain <nihaljain...@gmail.com> 于2025年5月22日周四 15:27写道： > > > > Hi team, > > > > I hope you're all doing well. I am writing to initiate a discussion > > regarding the upcoming release of hbase-thirdparty and our plans to > > integrate significant updates, including the addition of a Jetty 12 module > > as part of > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29225 > > > > --- > > > > Currently, our plan is to set Jetty 12 with EE8 for branch-3+, while > > branch-2 will continue using Jetty 9. > > > > For this, we have introduced a new module in hbase-thirdparty, which > > includes: > > - hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core: Contains shaded Jetty 12 core jars. > > - hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8: Contains shaded Jetty EE8 specific jars. > > > > Branches that want to consume EE8 will need to add both the > > `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-core` and `hbase-shaded-jetty-12-plus-ee8` > > dependencies, replacing the former `hbase-shaded-jetty`. In the future, we > > plan to introduce additional modules for EE9/EE10 as needed. > > > > Refer https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29224 > > > > --- > > > > There's been a proposal to manage this via separate branches in > > hbase-thirdparty: > > > > 1. **Master Branch (5.x) for HBase-3+:** > > - Incorporate Jetty 12 changes. > > - Transition to support JDK 17 and hbase-unsafe eventually > > > > 2. **Fork Branch (4.x) for HBase-2.x:** > > - Continue using Jetty 9. > > - Maintain support for JDK 8. > > > > Refer https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-29302 > > > > While this allows for modularized changes, it might increase our > > maintenance workload as going forward we may have to backport to both > > branches of hbase-thirdparty, as needed, and drive twice the number of > > releases for the same. > > > > An alternative could be maintaining a single branch with duplicated modules > > specific to jetty versions to reduce release workload but this will prevent > > us from moving to JDK 17. > > > > --- > > > > I welcome your thoughts on our strategy for handling these updates and on > > managing the branch strategy for hbase-thirdparty. > > > > Please let me know if you have any concerns or additional suggestions. Your > > input will be invaluable as we refine our approach to this release. > > > > Looking forward to your feedback. > > > > Best regards, > > Nihal Jain >
