Thanks Apoorv, I was going to update the mailing thread as well. Major kudos to Apoorv for the thorough work debugging and getting to the bottom of this tricky publishing issue, a subtle regression from the work he did in making the kafka-clients jar shadowed.
On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 5:09 PM Apoorv Mittal <apoorvmitta...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Stan, > I have opened the minor PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/15127 to > fix publishing the dependency. Once discussed and merged in trunk, I'll > update the 3.7 branch as well. > > Regards, > Apoorv Mittal > +44 7721681581 > > > On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 12:49 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > > > We found a blocker for 3.7: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-16077 > > > > Already having a PR under review to fix it. > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > On 1/3/24 10:43 AM, Stanislav Kozlovski wrote: > > > Hey all, happy new year. > > > > > > Thanks for the heads up Almog. Makes sense. > > > > > > To give an update - I haven't been able to resolve the gradlewAll > publish > > > failure, and as such haven't been able to release an RC. > > > As a minor barrier, I have to also update the year in the NOTICE file, > > > otherwise the release script won't let me continue - > > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/15111 > > > > > > Me and Apoorv synced offline and ran a few tests to debug the issue > > > regarding the clients build. I successfully executed `publish` when > > > pointing toward a custom jfrog repo with both JDK 8 and 17. Inspecting > > the > > > debug logs, the task that previously failed > > > `:clients:publishMavenJavaPublicationToMavenRepository'` passed > > > successfully. Here's a sample of the logs - > > > > > > https://gist.github.com/stanislavkozlovski/841060cb467ec1d179cc9f293c8702e7 > > > > > > Having read the release.py script a few times, I am not able to see > what > > is > > > different in the setup there. It simply clones the repo anew, gets the > > 3.7 > > > branch and runs the same command. > > > > > > At this point, I am contemplating pushing a commit to 3.7 that modifies > > the > > > release.py file that enables debug on the command: > > > diff --git a/release.py b/release.py > > > index 43c5809861..e299e10e74 100755 > > > --- a/release.py > > > +++ b/release.py > > > @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ with > > > open(os.path.expanduser("~/.gradle/gradle.properties")) as f: > > > contents = f.read() > > > if not user_ok("Going to build and upload mvn artifacts based on > these > > > settings:\n" + contents + '\nOK (y/n)?: '): > > > fail("Retry again later") > > > -cmd("Building and uploading archives", "./gradlewAll publish", > > > cwd=kafka_dir, env=jdk8_env, shell=True) > > > +cmd("Building and uploading archives", "./gradlewAll publish --debug", > > > cwd=kafka_dir, env=jdk8_env, shell=True) > > > cmd("Building and uploading archives", "mvn deploy -Pgpg-signing", > > > cwd=streams_quickstart_dir, env=jdk8_env, shell=True) > > > > > > release_notification_props = { 'release_version': release_version, > > > (END) > > > > > > and continuing to debug through that. > > > > > > Since the release.py script grabs a new copy of origin, we have to > modify > > > upstream. An alternative is for me to use my local github Kafka repo, > but > > > that may result in the script pushing a build of that into the remote > > > servers. > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 8:17 PM Almog Gavra <almog.ga...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hello Stan, > > >> > > >> I wanted to give you a heads up that > > >> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/15073 ( > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-16046) was identified as > a > > >> blocker regression and should be merged to trunk by EOD. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Almog > > >> > > >> On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 4:20 AM Stanislav Kozlovski > > >> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi Apoorv, > > >>> > > >>> Thanks for taking ownership and looking into this! One more caveat is > > >> that > > >>> I believe this first publish is ran with JDK 8, as the release.py > runs > > >> with > > >>> both JDK 8 and (if I recall correctly) 17 versions. This seems to > fail > > on > > >>> the first one - so JDK 8. > > >>> Not sure if that is related in any way. And I'm also not sure if it > > >> should > > >>> be kafka-clients or just clients. > > >>> > > >>> On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 10:48 AM Apoorv Mittal < > > apoorvmitta...@gmail.com > > >>> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Hi Stan, > > >>>> Thanks for looking into the release. I worked with `./gradlewAll > > >>>> publishToMavenLocal` which generates the respective > > `kafka-clients.jar` > > >>>> and deploys to maven local, I believed that `./gradlewAll publish` > > >> should > > >>>> just publish the artifacts to remote repository and hence should > > always > > >>>> work as jars successfully gets deployed to local maven. > > >>>> > > >>>> Though now I set up the remote private maven repository for myself > (on > > >>>> jfrog) and tried `./gradlewAll publish` on the 3.7 branch and > > >>>> successfully completed the build with all artifacts uploaded to the > > >>> remote > > >>>> repository. What seems strange to me is the error you mentioned in > the > > >>>> previous email regarding the reference of the clients jar. I suppose > > >> the > > >>>> reference should be to `kafka-clients.jar` rather than > `clients.jar`, > > I > > >>>> might be missing if something else gets triggered in the release > > >>> pipeline. > > >>>> Do you think I should set up the remote repository as per the > > >>> instructions > > >>>> in `release.py` and try running `./release.py` as that might do > > >> something > > >>>> different, though I suspect that it should? > > >>>> > > >>>> [image: Screenshot 2023-12-30 at 9.33.42 AM.png] > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Regards, > > >>>> Apoorv Mittal > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 2:13 AM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> > > >> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Just to update this thread, everything in KAFKA-14127 is done now. > A > > >> few > > >>>>> tasks got moved to a separate umbrella JIRA. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Some folks are going to do more testing, both manual and automated, > > in > > >>>>> the next week or two. I think this will give us a good indicator of > > >>>>> stability and what we need to fix. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Right now I'm leaning towards just making it GA since that's how > most > > >>>>> features work. It's kind of rare for us to do a multi-step rollout > > for > > >>> new > > >>>>> features. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> best, > > >>>>> Colin > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023, at 03:43, Mickael Maison wrote: > > >>>>>> Hi, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> With the current timeline for 3.7, I tend to agree with Viktor > that > > >>>>>> JBOD support in KRaft is unlikely to receive the extensive testing > > >>>>>> this feature needs before releasing. And that's not counting the > > >>>>>> testing tasks left to do in > > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-14127. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I'm fine sticking to the current 3.7 timeline but I'd err on the > > >> safe > > >>>>>> side and mark JBOD as early access to avoid major issues. Kafka is > > >>>>>> known for its robustness and resiliency and we certainly don't > want > > >> to > > >>>>>> lose the trust we gained over years. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>> Mickael > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 12:24 AM Ismael Juma <m...@ismaeljuma.com> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Hi Viktor, > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Extending the code freeze doesn't help stabilize things. If we > have > > >>>>>>> important bugs for JBOD, we should mark those as blockers and > we'll > > >>>>> wait > > >>>>>>> until they are fixed if the fixes won't take too long (as usual). > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Ismael > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 11:58 AM Viktor Somogyi-Vass > > >>>>>>> <viktor.somo...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Hi all, > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I was wondering what people think about extending the code > freeze > > >>>>> date to > > >>>>>>>> early January? > > >>>>>>>> The reason I'm asking is that there are still a couple of > testing > > >>>>> gaps in > > >>>>>>>> JBOD (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-14127) which > I > > >>>>> think is > > >>>>>>>> very important to finish to ensure a high quality release (after > > >>> all > > >>>>> this > > >>>>>>>> supposed to be the last 3.x) and secondly the year end holidays > > >> for > > >>>>> many > > >>>>>>>> people are coming fast, which means we'll likely have less > people > > >>>>> working > > >>>>>>>> on testing and validation. In my opinion it would strengthen the > > >>>>> release if > > >>>>>>>> we could spend a week in January to really finish off JBOD and > > >> do a > > >>>>> 2 week > > >>>>>>>> stabilization. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> What do you all think? > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>> Viktor > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 2:59 PM Stanislav Kozlovski > > >>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Hey! > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Just notifying everybody on this thread that I have cut the 3.7 > > >>>>> branch > > >>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>> sent a new email thread titled "New Release Branch 3.7" to the > > >>>>> mailing > > >>>>>>>> list > > >>>>>>>>> < > > >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/4j87m12fm3bgq01fgphtkfb41s56w6hh > > >>>>>> . > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 11:10 AM Stanislav Kozlovski < > > >>>>>>>>> stanis...@confluent.io> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hello again, > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Time is flying by! It is feature freeze day! > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> By today, we expect to have major features merged and to > > >> begin > > >>>>> working > > >>>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>> their stabilisation. Minor features should have PRs. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I am planning to cut the release branch soon - on Monday EU > > >>>>> daytime. > > >>>>>>>> When > > >>>>>>>>>> I do that, I will create a new e-mail thread titled "New > > >>> release > > >>>>> branch > > >>>>>>>>>> 3.7.0" to notify you, so be on the lookout for that. I will > > >>> also > > >>>>> notify > > >>>>>>>>>> this thread. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your contributions. Let's get this release > > >>> shipped! > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 6:11 PM Stanislav Kozlovski < > > >>>>>>>>>> stanis...@confluent.io> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hey all, > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> The KIP Freeze has passed. I count 31 KIPs that will be > > >> going > > >>>>> into the > > >>>>>>>>>>> 3.7 Release. Thank you all for your hard work! > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> They are the following (some of these were accepted in > > >>> previous > > >>>>>>>> releases > > >>>>>>>>>>> and have minor parts going out, some targeting a Preview > > >>>>> release and > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>> rest being fully released as regular.): > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-1000: List Client Metrics Configuration Resources > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-1001: Add CurrentControllerId Metric > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-405: Kafka Tiered Storage > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-580: Exponential Backoff for Kafka Clients > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-714: Client metrics and observability > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" & > > >>>>>>>>>>> "cache.max.bytes.buffering" with > > >>>>>>>>>>> "{statestore.cache}/{input.buffer}.max.bytes" > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-848: The Next Generation of the Consumer Rebalance > > >>>>> Protocol > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-858: Handle JBOD broker disk failure in KRaft > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-890: Transactions Server-Side Defense > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-892: Transactional StateStores > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-896: Remove old client protocol API versions in Kafka > > >>>>> 4.0 - > > >>>>>>>>>>> metrics/request log changes to identify deprecated apis > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-925: Rack aware task assignment in Kafka Streams > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-938: Add more metrics for measuring KRaft performance > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-951 - Leader discovery optimizations for the client > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-954: expand default DSL store configuration to custom > > >>>>> types > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-959: Add BooleanConverter to Kafka Connect > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-960: Single-key single-timestamp IQv2 for state > > >> stores > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-963: Additional metrics in Tiered Storage > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-968: Support single-key_multi-timestamp Interactive > > >>>>> Queries > > >>>>>>>>> (IQv2) > > >>>>>>>>>>> for Versioned State Stores > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-970: Deprecate and remove Connect's redundant task > > >>>>>>>> configurations > > >>>>>>>>>>> endpoint > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-975: Docker Image for Apache Kafka > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-976: Cluster-wide dynamic log adjustment for Kafka > > >>>>> Connect > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-978: Allow dynamic reloading of certificates with > > >>>>> different DN > > >>>>>>>> / > > >>>>>>>>>>> SANs > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-979: Allow independently stop KRaft processes > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-980: Allow creating connectors in a stopped state > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-985: Add reverseRange and reverseAll query over > > >>> kv-store > > >>>>> in > > >>>>>>>> IQv2 > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-988: Streams Standby Update Listener > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-992: Proposal to introduce IQv2 Query Types: > > >>>>>>>> TimestampedKeyQuery > > >>>>>>>>>>> and TimestampedRangeQuery > > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-998: Give ProducerConfig(props, doLog) constructor > > >>>>> protected > > >>>>>>>>> access > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Notable KIPs that didn't make the Freeze were KIP-977 - it > > >>> only > > >>>>> got > > >>>>>>>> 2/3 > > >>>>>>>>>>> votes. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> For the full list and latest source of truth, refer to the > > >>>>> Release > > >>>>>>>> Plan > > >>>>>>>>>>> 3.7.0 Document > > >>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.7.0 > > >>>>>>>>> . > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your contributions once again! > > >>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>> Stan > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 2:27 PM Nick Telford < > > >>>>> nick.telf...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Stan, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to propose including KIP-892 in the 3.7 release. > > >> The > > >>>>> KIP has > > >>>>>>>>>>>> been > > >>>>>>>>>>>> accepted and I'm just working on rebasing the > > >> implementation > > >>>>> against > > >>>>>>>>>>>> trunk > > >>>>>>>>>>>> before I open a PR. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Nick > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 11:27, Mayank Shekhar Narula < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> mayanks.nar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Stan > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you include KIP-951 to the 3.7 release plan? All PRs > > >>> are > > >>>>> merged > > >>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> trunk. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 4:05 PM Stanislav Kozlovski > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Friendly reminder to everybody that the KIP Freeze is > > >>>>> *exactly 7 > > >>>>>>>>> days > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> away* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - November 22. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A KIP must be accepted by this date in order to be > > >>>>> considered for > > >>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. Note, any KIP that may not be implemented in > > >>>>> time, or > > >>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> risks heavily destabilizing the release, should be > > >>>>> deferred. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stan > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 3, 2023 at 6:03 AM Sophie Blee-Goldman < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> sop...@responsive.dev> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks great, thank you! +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 10:21 AM David Jacot > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <dja...@confluent.io.invalid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 from me as well. Thanks, Stan! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 6:04 PM Ismael Juma < > > >>>>>>>> m...@ismaeljuma.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Stanislav, +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ismael > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 7:01 AM Stanislav > > >> Kozlovski > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Given the discussion here and the lack of any > > >>>>> pushback, I > > >>>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dates of the release: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP Freeze - *November 22 *(moved 4 days > > >> later) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Feature Freeze - *December 6 *(moved 2 days > > >>>>> earlier) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Code Freeze - *December 20* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If anyone has any thoughts against this > > >> proposal > > >>> - > > >>>>> please > > >>>>>>>>>>>> let me > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be good to settle on this early. These > > >> will > > >>>>> be the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> dates > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 12:15 AM Sophie > > >>>>> Blee-Goldman < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sop...@responsive.dev> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the response and explanations -- I > > >>>>> think the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> main > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was whether we intended to permanently > > >> increase > > >>>>> the KF > > >>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>> FF > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> gap > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> historical 1 week to 3 weeks? Maybe this was > > >> a > > >>>>>>>> conscious > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> decision > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed the memo, hopefully someone else can > > >>>>> chime in > > >>>>>>>>>>>> here. I'm > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> additional though. And looking around at some > > >>> of > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> recent > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems like we haven't been consistently > > >>>>> following the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> "usual" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2.x releases. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyways, my main concern was making sure to > > >>>>> leave a > > >>>>>>>> full > > >>>>>>>>> 2 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> weeks > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature freeze and code freeze, so I'm > > >>> generally > > >>>>> happy > > >>>>>>>>>>>> with the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> new > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposal. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Although I would still prefer to have the KIP > > >>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>> fall > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ismael actually brought up the same thing > > >>> during > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> 3.5.0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planning, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I'll just refer to his explanation for > > >> this: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We typically choose a Wednesday for the > > >> various > > >>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>>>>>> dates - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> often 1-2 day slips and it's better if that > > >>>>> doesn't > > >>>>>>>>>>>> require > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> working through the weekend. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (From this mailing list thread > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/dv1rym2jkf0141sfsbkws8ckkzw7st5h > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for driving the release! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sophie > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 8:13 AM Stanislav > > >>>>> Kozlovski > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the thorough response, Sophie. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Added to the "Future Release Plan" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Why is the KIP freeze deadline on a > > >>>>> Saturday? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was simply added as a starting point - > > >>>>> around 30 > > >>>>>>>>> days > > >>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement. We can move it earlier to the > > >>>>> 15th of > > >>>>>>>>>>>> November, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinking is later is better with these > > >> things > > >>>>> - it's > > >>>>>>>>>>>> already > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aggressive > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough. e.g given the choice of Nov 15 vs > > >> Nov > > >>>>> 18, I > > >>>>>>>>> don't > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> necessarily > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strong reason to choose 15. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If people feel strongly about this, to make > > >>> up > > >>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>> this, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eat > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the KF-FF time as I'll touch upon later, > > >> and > > >>>>> move FF > > >>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>> few > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> days > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> earlier > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> land on a Wednesday. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This reduces the time one has to get their > > >>>>> feature > > >>>>>>>>>>>> complete > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> after > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KF, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allows for longer time to a KIP accepted, > > >> so > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>> KF-FF > > >>>>>>>>>>>> gap > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when developing the feature in parallel. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> , this makes it easy for everyone to > > >>>>> remember when > > >>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> next > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadline > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so they can make sure to get everything in > > >> on > > >>>>> time. I > > >>>>>>>>>>>> worry > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> varying > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this will catch people off guard. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't see much value in optimizing the > > >>> dates > > >>>>> for > > >>>>>>>> ease > > >>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> memory - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> besides > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the KIP Freeze (which is the base date), > > >>> there > > >>>>> are > > >>>>>>>> only > > >>>>>>>>>>>> two > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> more > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dates > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remember that are on the wiki. More > > >>>>> importantly, we > > >>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plethora > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tools that can be used to set up reminders > > >> - > > >>>>> so a > > >>>>>>>>>>>> contributor > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> necessarily need to remember anything if > > >>>>> they're > > >>>>>>>>> serious > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> about > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> getting > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their feature in. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Is there a particular reason for > > >> having > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> feature > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> almost > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> full 3 weeks from the KIP freeze? ... > > >> having > > >>> 3 > > >>>>> weeks > > >>>>>>>>>>>> between > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KIP > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature freeze (which are > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually separated by just a single week)? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was going off the last two releases, > > >> which > > >>>>> had *20 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> days* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (~3 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weeks) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between KF & FF. Here are their dates: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - AK 3.5 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KF: 22 March > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FF: 12 April > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - (20 days after) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CF: 26 April > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - (14 days after) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Release: 15 June > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - 50 days after CF > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - AK 3.6 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KF: 26 July > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FF: 16 Aug > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - (20 days after) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CF: 30 Aug > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - (14 days after) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Release: 11 October > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - 42 days after CF > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know the precise reasoning for > > >>>>> extending the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> time, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> nor > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most appropriate time - but having talked > > >>>>> offline to > > >>>>>>>>> some > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> folks > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prior > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this discussion, it seemed reasonable. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your proposal uses an aggressive 1-week gap > > >>>>> between > > >>>>>>>>> both, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> which > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quite > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the jump from the previous 3 weeks. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps someone with more direct experience > > >>> in > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> recent can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chime > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here. Both for the reasoning for the > > >>> extension > > >>>>> from > > >>>>>>>> 1w > > >>>>>>>>>>>> to 3w > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> last > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, and how they feel about reducing > > >>> this > > >>>>>>>> range. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. On the other hand, we usually have a > > >>> full > > >>>>> two > > >>>>>>>>> weeks > > >>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze deadline to the code freeze but with > > >>>>> the given > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only be a week and a half. Given how > > >>> important > > >>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>> period is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> testing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and stabilizing the release, and how vital > > >>>>> this is > > >>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncovering > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blockers > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that would have delayed the release > > >>> deadline, I > > >>>>>>>> really > > >>>>>>>>>>>> think > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintain the two-week gap (at a minimum) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a fair point. At the end of the > > >> day, > > >>>>> we have > > >>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>> take > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> time > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> either one of the 3 ranges (now - KF; > > >> KF-FF; > > >>>>> FF-CF;) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *It sounds fair to me to take out half a > > >> week > > >>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>> KF-FF > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> add > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FF-CF*. e.g: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KF=Nov 18 (Sat) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FF=Dec 6 (Wed) 2.5w after > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CF=Dec 20 (Wed) 2w after > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How do others feel about this? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to throw a suggestion out there, if > > >> we > > >>>>> want to > > >>>>>>>>>>>> avoid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the winter holidays while still making up > > >> for > > >>>>>>>> slipping > > >>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what about something like this: ... > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the last 2 releases, they both > > >> had > > >>>>> a full > > >>>>>>>>>>>> month > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KIP > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Freeze and Code Freeze to finish > > >>>>> contributions. Your > > >>>>>>>>>>>> proposal > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a more aggressive 3 weeks e2e time. All > > >> else > > >>>>> equal, > > >>>>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> date > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be kept as early January, I would prefer > > >>> to > > >>>>> opt > > >>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> more > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accommodative 4-week period. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that historically, we have set all > > >> the > > >>>>>>>> deadlines > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when in doubt erred on the side of an > > >> earlier > > >>>>>>>> deadline > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ... We > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> often have, allowed things to come in late > > >>>>> between > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadline and the following Friday, but only > > >>> on > > >>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>> case-by-case > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This makes sense to me. The proposal I put > > >>>>> above puts > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the two > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> critical > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dates (FF & CF) on Wed to allow for this > > >>>>> flexibility > > >>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>> case > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 12:40 AM Sophie > > >>>>> Blee-Goldman > > >>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sop...@responsive.dev> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I have a few questions about the > > >>>>> schedule: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Why is the KIP freeze deadline on a > > >>>>> Saturday? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traditionally > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been on a Wednesday, which is nice > > >> because > > >>>>> it gives > > >>>>>>>>>>>> people > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Monday > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kick off the vote and give people a full > > >> 3 > > >>>>> working > > >>>>>>>>>>>> days to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vote > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it. Also, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Why are the subsequent deadlines on > > >>>>> different > > >>>>>>>> days > > >>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Usually > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we aim to have the freeze deadlines > > >>>>> separated by an > > >>>>>>>>>>>> integer > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> number > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weeks. Besides just being a consequence > > >> of > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> typical > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1/2 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> week > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separation > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between freeze dates, this makes it easy > > >>> for > > >>>>>>>> everyone > > >>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remember > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next deadline is so they can make sure to > > >>> get > > >>>>>>>>>>>> everything in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worry that varying this will catch people > > >>> off > > >>>>>>>> guard. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Is there a particular reason for > > >> having > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> feature > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> almost > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> full > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 weeks from the KIP freeze? I understand > > >>>>> moving > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> KIP > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadline > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to account for recent release delays, but > > >>>>> aren't we > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wasting > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gained time by having 3 weeks between the > > >>>>> KIP and > > >>>>>>>>>>>> feature > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (which > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually separated by just a single week)? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. On the other hand, we usually have a > > >>> full > > >>>>> two > > >>>>>>>>> weeks > > >>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze deadline to the code freeze but > > >> with > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>> given > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only be a week and a half. Given how > > >>>>> important this > > >>>>>>>>>>>> period > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> testing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and stabilizing the release, and how > > >> vital > > >>>>> this is > > >>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncovering > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blockers > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that would have delayed the release > > >>>>> deadline, I > > >>>>>>>>> really > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> think > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintain the two-week gap (at a minimum) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that historically, we have set all > > >> the > > >>>>>>>> deadlines > > >>>>>>>>>>>> on a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when in doubt erred on the side of an > > >>> earlier > > >>>>>>>>>>>> deadline, to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> encourage > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> folks > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get their work completed and > > >> stabilized > > >>>>> as soon > > >>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> often have, allowed things to come in > > >> late > > >>>>> between > > >>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadline and the following Friday, but > > >> only > > >>>>> on a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> case-by-case > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way the RM has the flexibility to > > >> determine > > >>>>> what to > > >>>>>>>>>>>> allow > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be, while still having everyone aim for > > >> the > > >>>>>>>>> established > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadlines. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to throw a suggestion out there, if > > >> we > > >>>>> want to > > >>>>>>>>>>>> avoid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> winter holidays while still making up for > > >>>>> slipping > > >>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> recent > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about something like this: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KIP Freeze: Nov 22nd > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feature Freeze: Nov 29th > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Code Freeze: Dec 13th > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can keep the release target as Jan 3rd > > >>> or > > >>>>> move > > >>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>> up to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dec > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 27th. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I would just aim to have it > > >> as > > >>>>> Dec 27th > > >>>>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> keep > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stated > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> target as Jan 3rd, to account for > > >>> unexpected > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> blockers/delays > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during the winter holidays > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 3:14 PM Sophie > > >>>>>>>> Blee-Goldman < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sop...@responsive.dev > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you add the 3.7 plan to the release > > >>>>> schedule > > >>>>>>>>>>>> page? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (this --> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan > > >> ) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 2:27 AM > > >> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>> Kozlovski > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> > > >> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey Chris, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the catch! It was indeed > > >>>>> copied and I > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sure > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the bullet point, so I kept it. > > >> What > > >>>>> you say > > >>>>>>>>>>>> makes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sense > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also added KIP-976! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 9:35 PM Chris > > >>>>> Egerton < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fearthecel...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Stanislav, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for putting this together! I > > >>>>> think the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> "Ensure > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> candidates include artifacts for the > > >>> new > > >>>>>>>> Connect > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test-plugins > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> module" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> section (which I'm guessing was > > >> copied > > >>>>> over > > >>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6.0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan?) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can be removed; we made sure that > > >>> those > > >>>>>>>>> artifacts > > >>>>>>>>>>>> were > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6.0, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I don't anticipate any changes > > >>> that > > >>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>> make > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> them > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likelier > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accidentally dropped in subsequent > > >>>>> releases > > >>>>>>>> than > > >>>>>>>>>>>> any > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maven > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artifacts > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we publish. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, can we add KIP-976 ( > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-976%3A+Cluster-wide+dynamic+log+adjustment+for+Kafka+Connect > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the release plan? The vote thread > > >>>>> for it > > >>>>>>>>> passed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> last > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> published a complete PR ( > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14538 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ), > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shouldn't be too difficult to get > > >>> things > > >>>>>>>> merged > > >>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> time > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.7.0. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 3:26 PM > > >>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Kozlovski > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for letting me drive it, > > >>> folks. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've created the 3.7.0 release > > >> page > > >>>>> here: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.7.0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It outlines the key milestones and > > >>>>> important > > >>>>>>>>>>>> dates > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In particular, since the last two > > >>>>> releases > > >>>>>>>>>>>> slipped > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> their > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> originally > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> targeted release date by taking an > > >>>>> average > > >>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>> 46 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> days > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposed to the minimum which is 14 > > >>>>> days), I > > >>>>>>>>>>>> pulled > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dates > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forward > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> try > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and catch up with the original > > >>> release > > >>>>>>>>> schedule. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can refer to the last release > > >>>>> during the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Christmas > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> holiday > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> season > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kafka 3.4 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.4.0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see sample dates. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The currently proposed dates are: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *KIP Freeze - 18th November > > >>>>> *(Saturday) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is 1 month and four days > > >> from > > >>>>> now - > > >>>>>>>>> rather > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> short - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> afraid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the only lever that's easy to pull > > >>>>> forward.* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As usual, a KIP must be accepted > > >> by > > >>>>> this > > >>>>>>>> date > > >>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> order > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> considered > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this release. Note, any KIP that > > >> may > > >>>>> not be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> implemented > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might destabilize the release, > > >>> should > > >>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>> deferred. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Feature Freeze - 8th December* > > >>>>> (Friday) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This follows 3 weeks after the > > >> KIP > > >>>>> Freeze, > > >>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>> has > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latest releases.* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> By this point, we want all major > > >>>>> features to > > >>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> merged & > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> working > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on stabilisation. Minor features > > >>>>> should have > > >>>>>>>>>>>> PRs, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be cut; anything not in this state > > >>>>> will be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> automatically > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moved > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release in JIRA > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Code Freeze - 20th December* > > >>>>> (Wednesday) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Critically, this is before the > > >>>>> holiday > > >>>>>>>> season > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ends > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> middle > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the week, to give contributors > > >> more > > >>>>> time and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> flexibility > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> address > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> last-minute without eating into > > >> the > > >>>>> time > > >>>>>>>>> people > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> holidays. It > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comes 12 days after the Feature > > >>>>> Freeze.This > > >>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>> two > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> days > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shorter > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usual code freeze window. I don't > > >>>>> have a > > >>>>>>>>> strong > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> am > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extend it to Friday, or trade off > > >> a > > >>>>> day/two > > >>>>>>>>>>>> with the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KF<->FF > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> date > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> range.* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Release -* *after January 3rd*. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *It comes after a minimum of two > > >>>>> weeks of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stabilization, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> earliest > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can start releasing is January > > >> 3rd. > > >>>>> We will > > >>>>>>>>>>>> move as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fast > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aim > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> completing it as early in January > > >> as > > >>>>>>>>> possible.* > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for the initially-populated > > >> KIPs > > >>>>> in the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan, I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> did > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I kept 4 KIPs that were mentioned > > >> in > > >>>>> 3.6, > > >>>>>>>>> saying > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> they > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minor > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts finished in 3.7 (as the > > >> major > > >>>>> ones > > >>>>>>>> went > > >>>>>>>>>>>> out in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-405 Tiered Storage > > >> mentioned a > > >>>>> major > > >>>>>>>>> part > > >>>>>>>>>>>> went > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> out > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder will come with 3.7 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-890 mentioned Part 1 shipped > > >>> in > > >>>>> 3.6. I > > >>>>>>>>> am > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> assuming > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come in 3.7, and have contacted > > >> the > > >>>>> author > > >>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> confirm. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-926 was partially > > >> implemented > > >>>>> in 3.6. > > >>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>> am > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assuming > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will come in 3.7, and have > > >> contacted > > >>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>> author > > >>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confirm. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-938 mentioned that the > > >>> majority > > >>>>> was > > >>>>>>>>>>>> completed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> small > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> re: ForwardingManager metrics will > > >>>>> come in > > >>>>>>>>> 3.7. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contacted > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> author > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to confirm. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I then went through the JIRA > > >> filter > > >>>>> which > > >>>>>>>>> looks > > >>>>>>>>>>>> at > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> open > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fix > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Version of 3.7 and added KIP-770, > > >>>>> KIP-858, > > >>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> KIP-980. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also found a fair amount of > > >> JIRAs > > >>>>> that > > >>>>>>>> were > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> targeting > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.7 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consecutively had no activity on > > >>> them > > >>>>> for > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> past > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> few > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of those, I pinged the author and > > >>>>> explicitly > > >>>>>>>>>>>> asked > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aim > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to 3.7. I have not > > >> included > > >>>>> those > > >>>>>>>> here > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hear > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confirmation. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review the plan and provide > > >>> any > > >>>>>>>>>>>> additional > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updates > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regarding KIPs that target this > > >>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>> version > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (3.7). > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you have authored any KIPs that > > >>>>> have an > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> inaccurate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> status > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or are not in the list and should > > >>> be, > > >>>>> or are > > >>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> list > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - please inform me in this thread > > >> so > > >>>>> that I > > >>>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>>>>>> keep > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> document > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accurate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and up to date. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Excited to get this release going! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All the best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 9:12 AM > > >>> Bruno > > >>>>>>>> Cadonna > > >>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cado...@apache.org > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Stan! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bruno > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/23 7:24 AM, Luke Chen > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Stanislav! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at > > >> 3:05 AM > > >>>>> Josep > > >>>>>>>> Prat > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <josep.p...@aiven.io.invalid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Stanislav! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ——— > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Josep Prat > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aiven Deutschland GmbH > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexanderufer 3-7, 10117 > > >> Berlin > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, > > >> HRB > > >>>>> 209739 > > >>>>>>>> B > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Oskari > > >>>>> Saarenmaa & > > >>>>>>>> Hannu > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valtonen > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> m: +491715557497 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> w: aiven.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e: josep.p...@aiven.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023, 20:05 > > >>> Chris > > >>>>>>>> Egerton > > >>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fearthecel...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1, thanks Stanislav! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023, 14:02 > > >>> Bill > > >>>>>>>> Bejeck < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bbej...@gmail.com > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Stanislav! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Bill > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at > > >>> 1:59 PM > > >>>>> Ismael > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Juma < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> m...@ismaeljuma.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for volunteering > > >>>>> Stanislav! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ismael > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at > > >>>>> 10:51 AM > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kozlovski > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io > > >>>>> .invalid> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey all! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to volunteer > > >>> to > > >>>>> be the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> manager > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driving > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release - Apache Kafka > > >>>>> *3.7.0*. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there are no > > >> objections, > > >>>>> I will > > >>>>>>>>>>>> start > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> share > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mayank Shekhar Narula > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> Best, > > >>>>>>>>> Stanislav > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Best, > > >>> Stanislav > > >>> > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- Best, Stanislav
