Hi Stamatis, Thanks for initiating this discussion. I'd love to have the great release cadence!
1. I don't have any objections about the timeline. We might want to release 4.1.1 in the future. I feel it should not block us from shipping the master branch anyway. 2. I'm willing to try being a release manager someday, but I have frequent hospital visits nowadays. I'm probably not the right person, given my unstable availability. 3. Except for issues that have already been discussed in mailing lists, I am not aware of critical problems. Best, Okumin On Thu, Oct 23, 2025 at 11:50 AM Butao Zhang <[email protected]> wrote: > > Should we release version 4.1.1? If we decide to proceed with 4.1.1, we may > need to identify valuable patches from recent commits for the 4.1 branch, > such as fixes for correctness issues, performance optimizations, and security > problems. > > If we skip 4.1.1 and instead release 4.2.0, would this imply that we've > reached a default agreement to only publish major version releases based on > the master branch going forward? > > Additionally, I have two tickets that may need to be addressed in the next > new version: one is HIVE-29145 (Iceberg Rest server cannot work if launched > by non-standalone HMS), and the other is HIVE-29213 (HS2 reports 'Failed to > get primary keys' when using old beeline client). > > Thanks, > Butao Zhang > > > On 2025/10/22 08:48:19 Denys Kuzmenko wrote: > > Hi Stamatis, > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. > > > > We already have enough items ready to ship, including JDK 21. > > I'm not sure what’s causing the delay. I thought we already had a release > > manager, but looks like we don’t. > > > > Regards, > > Denys > >
