Thank you for taking this on.
I'm specifically looking forward to releasing IMPALA-14452 in a PyPI
release, which is not
yet in any of the public releases (not even in the alphas). It is
TLS-related problem that we
encountered in various downstream environments.

The proposed tagging solution sounds reasonable to me; maybe signed tags
could be explored/used
to tie the PyPI publisher's identity to the tagger for a stronger coupling
between the two repos.

I'd be happy to help with any testing efforts; let me know.

Thanks,

  - LaszloG

On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 5:56 PM Michael Smith <[email protected]>
wrote:

> The rationale makes sense to me.
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 7:52 AM Csaba Ringhofer <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > Similarly to my previous thead ( [DISCUSS] impala-shell only release
> > (4.5.1?) ), I would like to create an impala-shell only release, but
> with a
> > bit different versioning than last time.
> >
> > For 4.5.1 two impala-shell alpha releases (a1, a2) and no proper releases
> > were created. It was based on branch
> > https://github.com/apache/impala/tree/branch-4.5.1 . This time I would
> not
> > use a proper branch, just tag the commit used for impala-shell release.
> >
> >    1. create an Impala-shell release 4.6a1 from master and tag that
> >    version, e.g. impala-shell-4.6.0a1
> >    2. after giving 4.6a1 some more testing, release impala-shell 4.6 and
> >    tag it similarly as the alpha
> >
> >
> > The motivation is to quickly create a release that contains some
> important
> > improvements (e.g.
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/impala/commit/8db91f044c1d9daae5a32cee63b1884893b21690
> > ).
> > and not wait for impala 5.0. The last releases were long time ago (4.3.0
> in
> > 2023, 4.5a2 in 2025 Summer).
> >
> > Reasons for using sprecifically version 4.6.0:
> > a. I think that calling it 4.6 is better than being 4.5 based as 4.5 is
> > very far from current asf-master, and most likely we'll never create a
> 4.6
> > impala release (5.0 is already under consideration)
> > b. on demand we can still create an impala-shell release on 4.5 line (for
> > example if new features are needed with Python 2.7 which was dropped in
> the
> > meantime)
> > c. I don't want to call it 5.0 as 5.0 is under consideration, but not yet
> > fully decided
> >
> > Regards,
> > Csaba
> >
>

Reply via email to