Hi Xinyu, I totally understand the reasoning behind it. There however is a non-technical issue that I see for which we should not release SW that relies on SNAPSHOTS.
If we do this, we are practically embedding software in our software, which has not formally been approved by a PMC. This is more a legal topic. Are the Ratis folks having technical issues with releasing? I know many projects at Apache write awesome software, but have problems maintaiing their build infrastructure. Perhaps that’s something I could help them with? And I guess we don’t need a new Ratis release for ever IoTDB release, right? Chris Von: Xinyu Tan <[email protected]> Datum: Donnerstag, 14. September 2023 um 07:02 An: [email protected] <[email protected]> Betreff: Re: AW: Ratis SNAPSHOT versions in our latest release ... Hi, Chris As mentioned by William, initially, we relied solely on the snapshot version of Ratis in the master branch to quickly validate many new bug fixes and features (just counted, we've added around 60 patches to the Ratis community in the past year). In fact, when we released a new version of IoTDB earlier this year, we attempted to encourage the Ratis community to release a new version as well. However, due to issues with some other patches in the community, the release went through multiple release candidates (rc), ultimately lasting close to one month, which affected IoTDB's release schedule. Looking back, in 2023, IoTDB released nearly 7 versions, while the Ratis community released only 2 versions. This has led us to the need to find a solution to balance the issues arising from different release speeds. Depending on a long-standing snapshot version is a last resort for us. Fortunately, with further collaboration between IoTDB and Ratis, Ratis in the context of IoTDB has recently become relatively stable. Therefore, we anticipate that in future releases, we will make an effort to ensure that IoTDB's release version also includes an official version of Ratis to avoid potential risks. Thanks for Chris's reminder! Xinyu Tan On 2023/09/13 14:31:13 Christofer Dutz wrote: > Hi all, > > after some discussions with colleagues it turns out that it’s not quite as > dramatic as I first throuhgt. So first I thought the commit hash was some way > to address one fixed SNAPSHOT version via some mechanism I just didn’t know > yet, but it turns out to be a lot simpler …. It produces a SNAPSHOT for > version “2.5.2-a4398bf“ … so it’s an artificial version for which then again > 3-5 SNAPSHOTS will be keept. > > Seems it’s some shorthand version of inofficially releasing things without > actually releasing them. > > So it’s still not ideal, as the referenced artifacts will never go to Maven > Central and could cause problems with the one or the other user, I don’t see > it as an immediate threat. > > Chris > > Von: Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> > Datum: Mittwoch, 13. September 2023 um 11:01 > An: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Betreff: Ratis SNAPSHOT versions in our latest release ... > Hi, > > I’m currently working on resolving some of the dependency version issues we > are having. > Mostly people will not have noticed, but currently we’re pulling in up to 4 > different versions of a jar in our build. This can cause many extremely hard > to spot problems. > > While trying to fix a problem with metrics-core in version 4.2.7 but pulling > in on older version in Ratis I noticed us using: > > <ratis.version>2.5.2-a4398bf-SNAPSHOT</ratis.version> > > This is extremely problematic. Currently the Apache Nexus server only keeps 5 > SNAPSHOT versions and then deletes old ones. This means that we regularly > have to bump the SNAPSHOT version of Ratis. > > This got me thinking and I checked the release branch for the 1.2.x branch. > Here we’re using the same. > > The problem with using SNAPSHOTS on master is not that severe, but using them > in releases it very problematic. I guess we’ll only be able to build our last > release for a few more days/weeks and then it will no longer be buildable. > > Are we relying on things in Ratis, that are not yet released? > > We should probably encourage the Ratis folks to head for a new release > (Ideally with my latest Ratis-PR merged). > > Chris >
