Maxim, I am super excited that we start discussing Ignite 3.0, but I think that leaving only half a year for all the 3.0 changes is overly optimistic. Moving to a major release allows us to significantly change APIs and default behavior, storage formats, etc. Honestly, I think just discussions will take months, let alone the implementation.
Perhaps, we can gradually shape the scope of Ignite 3.0 after Ignite 2.9 while releasing maintenance Ignite releases for 2.x, and set a date for Ignite 3.0 once there is a clear plan for it. пт, 8 мая 2020 г. в 13:06, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: > +1 to release 2.9 right after 2.8.1 > > > 8 мая 2020 г., в 12:53, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> написал(а): > > > > Folks, Denis, > > > > > > I think no one will argue against that frequent releases is good. The > > last major 2.8 release scope was frozen the last December, so having > > the next 2.9 release in September sounds not so good in general. We > > already have a lot of major features to release, for instance: > > - Sandbox for user-defined code [1] > > - .NET: Native Near Cache [2] > > - TDE - Phase-2. Master key rotation [3] > > - Thin client: compute support [4] > > > > I remember some folks at the last Apache Ignite meetup asking to > > release the `master key rotation` feature for their production. > > > > > > I suggest the following plan: > > - Ignite 2.9 (July 2020). Features that are already in the master branch. > > - Ignite 2.10 (September 2020). Improvements that will be ready > > throughout May-July. > > - Ignite 3.0 (January 2020). Improvements that will be completed > > within the August-November. > > > > > > Some thoughts about Apache Ignite 3.0 release. > > > > From my understanding, I think we should release Apache Ignite 3.0 by > > the end of this year even we would not have super-major features. > > Keeping backward compatibility for the previous versions which > > released more than 3 years ago requires a lot of effort. It doubles > > complexity of each new feature we adding to the product and floods the > > code with unnecessary if-else statements. > > > > I think the beginning of the 2021 year is a good point to stop doing > > such things and go further :-) We already have the huge wishlist [5] > > for Apache Ignite 3.0 and we should start removing stale source code > > from the master branch. > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11410 > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12691 > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12186 > > [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12835 > > [5] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+3.0+Wishlist > > > > On Thu, 7 May 2020 at 23:02, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > >> Igniters, > >> > >> Thanks for helping to put together our first roadmap for the rest of > 2020 > >> [1]. Turned out to be a handy source that should be appreciated by > Ignite > >> application developers. > >> > >> By looking at the page, it feels like we can plan a couple of releases: > >> > >> - Ignite 2.9 (early September) - it includes all the improvements that > >> should be ready throughout May-July. We reserve August for issues > fixing > >> and final release steps. > >> - Ignite 2.10 (late January 2021) - the release is for features that > >> should be completed within the August-November timeframe. Considering > the > >> holiday season, we'll use December and most of January for final > release > >> procedures. > >> > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > >> Also, is there anybody who is ready to take over release management > tasks > >> for 2.9? > >> > >> [1] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Apache+Ignite+Roadmap > >> > >> - > >> Denis > >
