+1 on 0.9.0 On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Ashish Singh <asi...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> +1 on 0.9.0 > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > I propose a simple rename: s/0.8.3/0.9.0/ > > > > No change of scope and not including current 0.9.0 issues. > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Rajini Sivaram < > > rajinisiva...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > Is the plan to release 0.9 in October with the features currently > > targeted > > > for 0.8.3, or would 0.9 be a later release including all the issues > > > currently targeted for 0.8.3 and 0.9? Will the scope of the release > > change > > > when it is renamed? > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Rajini > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Jay Kreps <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > > > > > +1 on 0.9 > > > > > > > > -Jay > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Kafka Fans, > > > > > > > > > > What do you think of making the next release (the one with > security, > > > new > > > > > consumer, quotas, etc) a 0.9.0 instead of 0.8.3? > > > > > > > > > > It has lots of new features, and new consumer was pretty much > scoped > > > for > > > > > 0.9.0, so it matches our original roadmap. I feel that so many > > awesome > > > > > features deserve a better release number. > > > > > > > > > > The downside is mainly some confusion (we refer to 0.8.3 in bunch > of > > > > > places), and noisy emails from JIRA while we change "fix version" > > field > > > > > everywhere. > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > Ashish >
