Hello again! Sorry for spam, but if our main feature is Java 11 support, why not call it 2.7.11? :)
Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev ср, 20 мар. 2019 г. в 12:58, Ilya Kasnacheev <ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com>: > Hello! > > Minor nitpick, why not 2.7.5 then? > > 2.7.3 is a kind of version that you want to hear more of its story. > However, releasing a "half releases" of N.5 is a very old tradition in > software, when there are more changes than in a minor fix but not enough to > increment N. > > Regards, > -- > Ilya Kasnacheev > > > ср, 20 мар. 2019 г. в 08:30, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > >> 2.7.3 sounds reasonable to me, like the idea. Who'll kick off the release >> procedures and lead it? >> >> - >> Denis >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 5:05 AM Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > As far as I remember that's not the first time we choose X.Y instead of >> > X.Y.Z, because of ... >> > So, seems we have to choose it now. >> > >> > >> Anton or Nikolay, would you like to be a release manager for 2.7.1? >> > I can assist or perform the technical part of the release. >> > >> > >> Also, I can suggest 2.7.3 release as first Ignite maintenance release >> > Agree >> > >> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:53 PM Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > > Anton, thanks for checking compatibility. >> > > >> > > Anton or Nikolay, would you like to be a release manager for 2.7.1 ? >> > > >> > > 1) Ticket version update happens from time to time, it is a mass >> update >> > in >> > > JIRA - 1 operation. Actually, we have tradition noticed by Alex G: >> > > >> > > even-numbered minor release all were emergency-styled: 2.2, 2.4, 2.6, >> and >> > > why not 2.8? >> > > >> > > 2) If we select 2.7.1: one major problem can occur - it is artifacts >> > > versions clash for another company (and probably a lot of users >> > involved), >> > > because there is ignite-core 2.7.1. issued from Ignite fork. This >> issue >> > is >> > > now solved, so 2.8.1/2.9.1. can be created later without any risk >> > > >> > > 3) Also, I can suggest 2.7.3 release as first Ignite maintenance >> release >> > - >> > > cause there is no risk of clash here, as well. Otherwise, we need to >> > select >> > > between one company's internal links update vs another company's >> artifact >> > > clash. >> > > >> > > Here I feel 2.7.1 is more natural, but it is safer to keep the >> process as >> > > is, for at least, this release. >> > > >> > > Sincerely, >> > > Dmitriy Pavlov >> > > >> > > пн, 18 мар. 2019 г. в 11:53, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: >> > > >> > > > +1 to 2.7.1 version. >> > > > >> > > > I think it's time to learn to do minor releases. >> > > > >> > > > пн, 18 мар. 2019 г. в 11:51, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org>: >> > > > >> > > > > The major objection is to release 2.7.1 as 2.8. >> > > > > >> > > > > 1) A lot of people fixed issues at master with version 2.8. >> > > > > So, they and their companies/customers (who used Ignite) waits for >> > 2.8 >> > > > > because of fixes. >> > > > > At least my company waits for fixes at 2.8. >> > > > > It will be a real problem to update all private links for 2.9 to >> wait >> > > for >> > > > > another release. >> > > > > "You told me you fixed this at 2.8, ... lair", that what I expect. >> > > > > >> > > > > 2) You'll have to update 1000+ issues to have 2.9 as the fixed >> > version. >> > > > > This will look odd to contributors. >> > > > > >> > > > > 3) I do not see any problems to release AI as 2.7.1. >> > > > > I checked that assembly and release procedure have no issues with >> > this >> > > > > version. >> > > > > >> > > > > P.s. I'm ready to assist or to release AI as 2.7.1 in case someone >> > > > doubts. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 11:52 PM Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Dmitriy, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks for putting this together and sharing the results of our >> > > > > > conversation in a smaller group. Igniters, if there are no major >> > > > > objections >> > > > > > I would suggest us kicking off release related procedures early >> > next >> > > > > week. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > - >> > > > > > Denis >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 6:05 AM Dmitriy Pavlov < >> dpav...@apache.org >> > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi everybody, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I had a private talk with Denis, Vladimir, and Alex G. As far >> I >> > > > > > understood >> > > > > > > the problem with the master based release is not only 2 or >> more >> > > > faulty >> > > > > > > commits, but 1040 commits we have since 2.7. All of these >> commits >> > > > need >> > > > > to >> > > > > > > be tested (unfortunately not all QA steps are visible to the >> > > > > community), >> > > > > > > and this will require the most amount of time. Reverting and >> > > > disabling >> > > > > a >> > > > > > > couple of features is possible, but other commits may impact >> > users. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > You can find a complete list here >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XJAsPEhYLcudVK4kdd6ZDoFZ6dnbAokgdJUDjWVZsKM/edit#gid=1445866798 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > And estimation of commits related to Java 11 (plus commits >> fixing >> > > > > native >> > > > > > > persistence critical problems) is less than 50. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > So to get faster release we may use branch ignite-2.7 + >> fixes. I >> > > > > suggest >> > > > > > > naming release as 2.8 and next 2.9 (cause 2.8 now and 2.8.1 as >> > > master >> > > > > > based >> > > > > > > is counter-intuitive). >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 2.7.1, for now, is not an option because >> > > > > > > A. we never did it before, and Java 11 fixes are urgent. A >> new >> > > > > > > experimental release may delay us, as well. >> > > > > > > B. in this case we don't need 2.7.2 because there is almost >> no >> > > risk >> > > > > that >> > > > > > > additional changes will be necessary. >> > > > > > > we can schedule 2.9.1 with fixes may be necessary after new >> cool >> > > > > release >> > > > > > > after 1.5 months. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > So, I'm ok to do ( +0.5 ) an emergency-style release for Java >> 11, >> > > > > > warnings >> > > > > > > provisioning and corruption fix. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > To finalize the scope, please share your commits in 3 days, >> which >> > > > needs >> > > > > > to >> > > > > > > go to scope. Also, you can contribute by removing unnecessary >> > > commit >> > > > > from >> > > > > > > sheet above. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Sincerely, >> > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > пн, 11 мар. 2019 г. в 16:31, Dmitriy Pavlov < >> dpav...@apache.org >> > >: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi Ignite Developers, >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I remember I've fixed one case of Corrupted Tree Exception, >> and >> > > > this >> > > > > > fix >> > > > > > > > still not released. This is DB corruption, and loss of data: >> > if >> > > > user >> > > > > > > face >> > > > > > > > with it he/she will probably ban Ignite for him/her >> preferences >> > > > > > forever. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > If we select 2.7.1 (BTW it is more natural naming of >> proposed >> > > > > release, >> > > > > > > > here I agree with proposed numbering), we can not ship this >> and >> > > > > similar >> > > > > > > > fixes made by Igniters. And what is the reason for this? Is >> it >> > > the >> > > > > > > presence >> > > > > > > > of a number of faulty commits in master? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > How long does it take us to revert not tested features from >> > > > > ignite-2.8 >> > > > > > > > provided that branch is created from the master? >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Sincerely, >> > > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > пн, 11 мар. 2019 г. в 11:37, Ilya Kasnacheev < >> > > > > > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com >> > > > > > > >: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Hello! >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > - *was hard to start the code samples (same issue as >> > with >> > > > > > cmd).* >> > > > > > > >> > - *The step above have to be repeated for every >> single >> > > > > sample* >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> For this issue, do we have any solution at all? I'm afraid >> you >> > > > will >> > > > > > > still >> > > > > > > >> have to add JVM args manually for every main class or test >> > that >> > > > you >> > > > > > run. >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> Regards, >> > > > > > > >> -- >> > > > > > > >> Ilya Kasnacheev >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> чт, 7 мар. 2019 г. в 21:03, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org >> >: >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > Dmitriy, >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > Please find a copy-paste from the first conversation when >> > > > > impactful >> > > > > > > >> > usability problems were reported more than a month ago: >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > *I played with the latest Oracle JDK 11 on Mac OS Mojave. >> > > > Results >> > > > > > are >> > > > > > > >> sad:* >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > - *Starting a node from cmd (ignite.sh) - FAILED* >> > > > > > > >> > - *Opening Ignite examples - BAD EXPERIENCE* >> > > > > > > >> > - *pom.xml wasn't detected automatically, had to >> > select >> > > it >> > > > > > > >> manually* >> > > > > > > >> > - *was hard to start the code samples (same issue >> as >> > > with >> > > > > > cmd). >> > > > > > > >> As a >> > > > > > > >> > committer, I know how to fix it >> > > > > > > >> > ( >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/getting-started#section-running-ignite-with-java-9-10-11 >> > > > > > > >> > < >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/getting-started#section-running-ignite-with-java-9-10-11 >> > > > > > > >> > >), >> > > > > > > >> > but most of the developers have no glue and will >> give >> > > up* >> > > > > > > >> > - *The step above have to be repeated for every >> single >> > > > > sample* >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > Now, imagine that dozens of users new to Ignite go >> through >> > > this. >> > > > > > Most >> > > > > > > of >> > > > > > > >> > them will quit after the failures above and switch to an >> > > > alternate >> > > > > > > >> solution >> > > > > > > >> > - there are many choices depending on a use case. >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > Give me a call if it still doesn't sound convincing to >> you. >> > > > What I >> > > > > > > would >> > > > > > > >> > do, considering Vladimirs's feedback, if the master is >> > really >> > > > in a >> > > > > > bad >> > > > > > > >> > shape then I would release 2.8 from 2.7 and 2.8.1, 2.8.2, >> > etc. >> > > > > will >> > > > > > be >> > > > > > > >> > released from the master. >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > - >> > > > > > > >> > Denis >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 9:52 AM Dmitriy Pavlov < >> > > > dpav...@apache.org >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> > > Denis, there is not so much difference in Java 9 vs >> Java >> > 11, >> > > > so >> > > > > > > >> previous >> > > > > > > >> > > Java 9-efforts done by Igniters should be applicable >> for >> > 11. >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > So I don't understand why we can go through the normal >> > > release >> > > > > > > process >> > > > > > > >> > and >> > > > > > > >> > > pilot minor releases afterward. Please share a >> particular >> > > case >> > > > > > when >> > > > > > > >> the >> > > > > > > >> > > absence of `emergency 2.8` is a problem for the user. >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Is it still our rush and 'highway or no way'? I was in >> the >> > > > hope >> > > > > it >> > > > > > > is >> > > > > > > >> > gone. >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > чт, 7 мар. 2019 г. в 20:43, Denis Magda < >> > dma...@apache.org >> > > >: >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Vova, >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Thanks for the inputs. If it takes weeks to stabilize >> > the >> > > > > master >> > > > > > > >> then >> > > > > > > >> > > let's >> > > > > > > >> > > > release from 2.7 cherry-picking Java 11 >> improvements. We >> > > > can't >> > > > > > > wait >> > > > > > > >> for >> > > > > > > >> > > > months holding these improvements - the world is >> > switching >> > > > to >> > > > > > Java >> > > > > > > >> 11 >> > > > > > > >> > and >> > > > > > > >> > > > Ignite fails during the first runs presently. >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > - >> > > > > > > >> > > > Denis >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 9:28 AM Vladimir Ozerov < >> > > > > > > >> voze...@gridgain.com> >> > > > > > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Igniters, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Making release from master is not an option. We >> have a >> > > lot >> > > > > of >> > > > > > > >> > > > not-yet-ready >> > > > > > > >> > > > > and not-yet-tested features. From SQL side this is >> > > > partition >> > > > > > > >> pruning >> > > > > > > >> > > and >> > > > > > > >> > > > > SQL views with KILL command. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > So if we do not want to release a mess, then there >> are >> > > > only >> > > > > > two >> > > > > > > >> > > options: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > release Java 11 fixes on top of 2.7, or make normal >> > > > release >> > > > > in >> > > > > > > >> about >> > > > > > > >> > > > 1.5-2 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > month with proper feature freeze process and >> testing. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Vladimir. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > чт, 7 марта 2019 г. в 20:10, Ilya Kasnacheev < >> > > > > > > >> > > ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com >> > > > > > > >> > > > >: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hello! >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Then please fast-forward review and merge >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11299 >> > > > > because >> > > > > > it >> > > > > > > >> > breaks >> > > > > > > >> > > > SSL >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > on >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Windows under Java 11. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Anything else that needs to be merged before >> release >> > > is >> > > > > > > >> branched? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Regards, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Ilya Kasnacheev >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > чт, 7 мар. 2019 г. в 20:07, Nikolay Izhikov < >> > > > > > > >> nizhi...@apache.org>: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > +1 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > чт, 7 марта 2019 г., 20:00 Denis Magda < >> > > > > dma...@apache.org >> > > > > > >: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Igniters, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > How about releasing Ignite 2.8 from the >> master - >> > > > > > creating >> > > > > > > >> the >> > > > > > > >> > > > release >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > branch on Monday-Tuesday, as fast as we can? >> > Don't >> > > > > want >> > > > > > us >> > > > > > > >> to >> > > > > > > >> > > delay >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > with >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Java 11 improvements, they are really helpful >> > from >> > > > the >> > > > > > > >> > usability >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > standpoint. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > After this release, let's introduce a >> practice >> > of >> > > > > > > >> maintenance >> > > > > > > >> > > > > releases >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > 2.8.x. Those who are working on any >> improvements >> > > and >> > > > > > won't >> > > > > > > >> > merge >> > > > > > > >> > > > them >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > to >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > the release branch on Monday-Tuesday will be >> > able >> > > to >> > > > > > roll >> > > > > > > >> out >> > > > > > > >> > in >> > > > > > > >> > > a >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > point >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > release like 2.8.1 slightly later. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > - >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Denis >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 6:22 AM Dmitriy >> Pavlov < >> > > > > > > >> > > dpav...@apache.org> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi Ignite Developers, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > In the separate topic, we've touched the >> > > question >> > > > of >> > > > > > > next >> > > > > > > >> > > release >> > > > > > > >> > > > > of >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Apache >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Ignite. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > The main reason for the release is Java 11 >> > > > support, >> > > > > > > >> > modularity >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > changes >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > (actually we have a couple of this kind of >> > > fixes). >> > > > > > > >> > > Unfortunately, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > full >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > modularity support is impossible without >> 3.0 >> > > > because >> > > > > > > >> package >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > refactoring >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > is >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > breaking change in some cases. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > But I clearly remember that in 2.7 thread >> > we've >> > > > also >> > > > > > > >> > discussed >> > > > > > > >> > > > that >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > next release will contain step 1 of >> services >> > > > > > redesign, - >> > > > > > > >> > > > discovery >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > protocol >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > usage for services redeploy. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > We have 2 alternative options for releasing >> > 2.8; >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > A. (in a small way): 2.7-based branch with >> > > > > particular >> > > > > > > >> commits >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > cherry-picked >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > into it. It is analog of emergency release >> but >> > > > > without >> > > > > > > >> really >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > emergency. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Since we don't release our new modules we >> have >> > > > more >> > > > > > time >> > > > > > > >> to >> > > > > > > >> > > make >> > > > > > > >> > > > it >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > modular >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > for 2.9 and make Ignite fully modules >> > compliant >> > > in >> > > > > 3.0 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > B. (in large) And, it is a full release >> based >> > on >> > > > > > master, >> > > > > > > >> it >> > > > > > > >> > > will >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > include >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > new hibernate version, ignite-compress, >> > > > > > ignite-services, >> > > > > > > >> and >> > > > > > > >> > > all >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > other >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > changes we have. Once it is published we >> will >> > > not >> > > > be >> > > > > > > able >> > > > > > > >> to >> > > > > > > >> > > > change >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > something. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Please share your vision, and please stand >> up >> > if >> > > > you >> > > > > > > want >> > > > > > > >> to >> > > > > > > >> > > lead >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > this >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > release (as release manager). >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Sincerely, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
