Folks, Versioning is a separate topic. We agreed on the current scheme in March [1]. If someone thinks we need to change it, please create a new thread and present your suggestions.
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r17ebaad35ca2bd70e716e67683ae7fec9bd97372b6cc57a7e9c81f9d%40%3Cdev.ignite.apache.org%3E -Val On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 12:37 PM Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: > Seems rational. > > > But still 2.11.0 and 21.1.0 for the time being will look like similar or > error in either version... > > > > On 27 Sep 2021, at 18:11, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I mean that Ignite 2.x will continue to use old scheme and Ignite 3 > > will be e.g. Ignite 21.1 and so on. > > > > 2021-09-27 14:57 GMT+03:00, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>: > >> How will not they clash if version is based only on date? > >> > >>> On 27 Sep 2021, at 14:33, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> Today it is quite common to use calendar-based versioning scheme, e.g. > >>> [1]. We can consider it for Ignite 3. Luckily versions will not clash. > >>> > >>> [1] https://www.cockroachlabs.com/docs/releases/index.html > >>> > >>> 2021-09-27 10:49 GMT+03:00, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>: > >>>> That name will definitely confuse Jira users. > >>>> > >>>> Let's stick to basic devision by 2.x and 3.x — it seems most intuitive > >>>> and > >>>> has lots of examples inside ASF, look at the Tomcat for instance. > >>>> > >>>>> On 25 Sep 2021, at 21:05, Saikat Maitra <saikat.mai...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> I like the major version update like Ignite 3.0 but if we were to > come > >>>>> up > >>>>> with a name my other suggestion would be > >>>>> > >>>>> Ignite-kernel > >>>>> > >>>>> kernel - for the central or most important part of something > >>>>> > >>>>> Also taken references from Compute kernel - a routine compiled for > high > >>>>> throughput accelerators > >>>>> > >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compute_kernel > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Saikat > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 3:12 AM Valentin Kulichenko < > >>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Kafka and Spark didn't split codebases (at least to my knowledge). > >>>>>> Separating codebases was the fundamental step, everything else is a > >>>>>> technicality. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Having said that, I will be OK with your suggestion as I don't > really > >>>>>> see > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> difference, although I'm not sure we will be able to come up with a > >>>>>> name > >>>>>> that is more intuitive than a separate project :) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Let's see what others think. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -Val > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, Sep 25, 2021 at 12:23 AM Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Moving the discussion back to the dev list. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Val, Andrey, for that purpose we can ask INFRA to create a > >>>>>>> special mandatory field such as "Architecture" with two predefined > >>>>>> values - > >>>>>>> "Ignite 2.x" and "Ignite 3.x". Come up with a better name, it needs > >>>>>>> to > >>>>>>> be > >>>>>>> intuitive enough even for users who submit issues. What disturbs me > >>>>>>> is > >>>>>> that > >>>>>>> neither Kafka nor Spark have a different project for the recently > >>>>>> released > >>>>>>> versions 3. A different GitHub project is not that disturbing. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - > >>>>>>> Denis > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 4:09 AM Valentin Kulichenko < > >>>>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Denis, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> From a purely technical perspective, these are indeed two separate > >>>>>>>> projects, because they are based on different codebases. The split > >>>>>> you're > >>>>>>>> talking about happened a year ago, when we created the repo for > >>>>>>>> Ignite > >>>>>> 3. > >>>>>>>> This significantly differs from the 1.x->2.x transition, as these > >>>>>>>> two > >>>>>>>> shared the codebase. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> For the same reason, a bug filed for 2.x can't be just > transitioned > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>> 3.x. It will either not exist in 3.x in the first place, or will > >>>>>> require > >>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>> completely different fix, which will mean two different tickets. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> That said, I still believe that Ignite 2 and Ignite 3 are just > >>>>>> different > >>>>>>>> versions of the same product, because, as you correctly mentioned, > >>>>>>>> they > >>>>>>>> target "same users, community, use cases". At the same time, they > >>>>>>>> are > >>>>>>>> developed as different projects on the technical level. Let's not > >>>>>> confuse > >>>>>>>> these two aspects with each other - they are largely orthogonal. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> At this point, creating a Jira project doesn't change anything > >>>>>>>> fundamentally. It's only about ease of use of our tooling and > >>>>>>>> efficient > >>>>>>>> ticket management. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -Val > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 10:15 PM Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Folks, you confuse me. I've never treated Ignite 3 as a different > >>>>>>>>> project. It's the same Ignite (distributed database for > >>>>>> high-performance > >>>>>>>>> computing...) but on a modernized architecture and APIs - thus, a > >>>>>> major > >>>>>>>>> version. Same users, community, use cases. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> But, I'm against separate JIRA or Confluence projects. This is > how > >>>>>>> you're > >>>>>>>>> truly stepping on a project-split path. When we used to work on > >>>>>>>>> Ignite > >>>>>>> 2 we > >>>>>>>>> could live within the same JIRA space with Ignite 1. Moreover, > many > >>>>>>> tickets > >>>>>>>>> that are filed against Ignite 2 can be fixed in Ignite 3 only - > >>>>>>>>> which > >>>>>>> is a > >>>>>>>>> version change in our JIRA. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> So, -1 from me for the separate JIRA proposal. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>> Denis > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 8:23 AM Maxim Muzafarov < > mmu...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Val, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I don't see any issues having different projects under Ignite's > >>>>>>>>>> brand > >>>>>>>>>> from the developer's side except the versioning issue. This is a > >>>>>>>>>> bad > >>>>>>>>>> case when two different projects must have dependent versions > and > >>>>>> even > >>>>>>>>>> worse when some marketing things affect the development and > >>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>> processes. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I agree with Nikolay and Ilya - the right way here is having > >>>>>>>>>> "Ignite<new-gen abrv>" and versioning started from zero. > However, > >>>>>> both > >>>>>>>>>> of Ignite's can easily co-exist. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 21 Sept 2021 at 22:13, Valentin Kulichenko > >>>>>>>>>> <valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Ilya, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> What exactly is this different focus and different values? Why > >>>>>>> exactly > >>>>>>>>>> do you think Ignite 3 will never cover all the current features? > >>>>>>>>>> And > >>>>>>> why is > >>>>>>>>>> this the criteria in the first place? I work on both Ignite 2 > and > >>>>>>> Ignite 3 > >>>>>>>>>> almost every day and I simply don't think all this is true. I > >>>>>> honestly > >>>>>>>>>> can't understand what this fuss is all about. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Folks, quite frankly, this discussion seems counterproductive > at > >>>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>> point. Are there any particular suggestions? If so, let's > discuss > >>>>>> them. > >>>>>>>>>> Otherwise, let's just do some coding - isn't that why we are all > >>>>>> here? > >>>>>>> :) > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -Val > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:52 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < > >>>>>>>>>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hello! > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I concur with Nikolay. Maybe Ignite 3 should be called "Ignite > >>>>>> <some > >>>>>>>>>> adverb>" because it is a product with a different focus and > values > >>>>>>> which > >>>>>>>>>> has no plans to cover the entirety of Ignite's features. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> вт, 21 сент. 2021 г. в 17:56, Nikolay Izhikov < > >>>>>> nizhi...@apache.org > >>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, Ignite PMC. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there any reason to keep calling Ignite3 as "Ignite"? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems to me that from the very beginning Ignite3 is a new > >>>>>>>>>> database engine built on completely new architecture. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignite2 and Ignite3 has nothing similar except the name. All > is > >>>>>>>>>> different > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - source code. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - repository. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - features. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - API. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - road map. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - contributors. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - contribution rules. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - release cycle. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> *** you are here *** > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - jira > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - confluence > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Should we accept the fact that thing we calling as "Ignite3" > is > >>>>>>> just > >>>>>>>>>> another project? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you, please, share your vision on how Ignite and Ignite3 > >>>>>> should > >>>>>>>>>> coexists? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> вт, 21 сент. 2021 г. в 17:13, Dmitry Pavlov < > dpav...@apache.org > >>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok, if nobody minds, I'll create spaces a bit later. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I hope it is not too urgent. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sincerely, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy Pavlov > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2021/09/21 10:37:42, Valentin Kulichenko < > >>>>>>>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitry, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> According to Infra, this has to be done through > >>>>>>>>>> http://selfserve.apache.org/, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but only PMC chairs have access. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you please assist with the creation of the Jira > project > >>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Confluence space? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:46 AM Valentin Kulichenko < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Infra requests created: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-22349 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-22350 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 10:50 AM Petr Ivanov < > >>>>>>>>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since we've agreed that there are two projects (that are > >>>>>>>>>> Ignite2 and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignite3), separate development environments seem to be > >>>>>>> logical > >>>>>>>>>> and natural > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> course of things. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Sep 2021, at 12:42, Alexander Polovtcev < > >>>>>>>>>> alexpolovt...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a welcome proposal, because we already have some > >>>>>>>>>> pending Ignite > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specific documents, and it is not clear where to put > them > >>>>>>> at > >>>>>>>>>> the moment. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 4:22 AM Valentin Kulichenko < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Igniters, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think it's clear to all of us that Ignite 2.x and 3.x > >>>>>>>>>> will coexist > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while. They are developed in separate Git repos, but we > >>>>>>>>>> still > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accumulate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the tickets for both versions in the same Jira project, > >>>>>>>>>> which seems to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> complicate the ticket management. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we use the "ignite-3" label for 3.x > >>>>>> tickets, > >>>>>>>>>> but this > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> approach > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is fragile. If someone forgets to add the label to a > new > >>>>>>>>>> ticket, it's > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likely to be lost. We need a better separation. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All the above is true for Wiki as well - we use a > single > >>>>>>>>>> Confluence > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> space. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I suggest creating a new Jira project and a new > >>>>>> Confluence > >>>>>>>>>> space for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignite > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 and moving all the relevant tickets and pages there. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts or objections? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Val > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With regards, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aleksandr Polovtcev > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Ivan Pavlukhin > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > > > Best regards, > > Ivan Pavlukhin > >
