Thanks Mike for volunteering! I wanted to get SOLR-8619 in for 5.5.0, I'll mark that as a blocker as it can potentially cause data loss. I'm currently working on that.
I also have a bunch of Solr related stuff I wanted to commit before moving on the 6.0 path so back-compat wouldn't be a problem, but we can always have another deprecation release before 6.0 if needed, specially once we have the git based release process ironed out. I am not saying we WILL have another 5.x release, just a thought. It all depends on the release timeline for 6.0 :) On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Michael McCandless < luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > Thanks Christine, I'll wait for SOLR-8621 before cutting the branch. > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ > LONDON) <cpoersc...@bloomberg.net> wrote: > > +1 for 5.5.0 release. > > > > Am about to mark SOLR-8621 as a blocker, it's basically 'done' (with > collaboration and help from Shai) but a signature change for > MergePolicyFactory will be needed to support SOLR-5730 (which ideally would > also be included in 5.5.0 and which hopefully can be wrapped up this week > also, patch update to follow later today). > > > > Sorry for not speaking up about these two tickets earlier, I had > optimistically thought that they would be done-and-dusted by 'mid this > week' but it didn't quite turn out like that ... > > > > Christine > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: dev@lucene.apache.org > > To: dev@lucene.apache.org > > At: Feb 5 2016 10:17:40 > > > > Thanks Nick and Anshum, I'll volunteer to be RM. If there are blocker > > 5.5 issues, please mark them as such in Jira, thanks! > > > > I don't think we are rushing here ... it was a little under a month > > ago when I had thought "in or week or two" let's cut the 6.x branch ;) > > > > I see 5.5 release as just getting all the (stable) backported features > > out to the world before we release 6.0.0. > > > > I'll aim to cut the 5.5 branch mid next week... > > > > Mike McCandless > > > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> > wrote: > >> I have a few things I'd like to get in. I hope to get those in by next > week. > >> > >> I think the 5.5 release is an important one for us as the cleanup in 6.0 > >> depends on it. We shouldn't rush it. > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Nicholas Knize <nkn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 for 5.5.0 release. I have 2 issues I'd like to get in for 5.5: > >>> LUCENE-6930 and LUCENE-6997 which changes GeoPoint encoding (boosting > >>> performance), and graduates these features from sandbox. They should be > >>> ready by Monday (or sooner). > >>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Michael McCandless > >>> <luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> I think we are in good shape now for 6.0.0? > >>>> > >>>> git cutover is done and seems to be going well except for how we name > >>>> branches > >>>> > >>>> Dimensional values are renamed to point values, the API is cleaned up > >>>> a bit, and you can now search for == (not just ranges), and > >>>> StoredDocument is removed. > >>>> > >>>> We should first do a 5.5.0 release to get all the goodness back-ported > >>>> 5.x features out, and also smoke-test our first git-based release. > >>>> Does anyone want to volunteer as RM? > >>>> > >>>> Mike McCandless > >>>> > >>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 2:52 PM Michael McCandless > >>>> > <luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I agree it would be nice to have cutover to git by then: are we > ready > >>>> >> to open an INFRA issue to do the hard cutover? Or do we still have > >>>> >> things to do on our end? (Thank you Dawid and Mark and Paul and > Uwe > >>>> >> and everyone else for pushing hard on this front!). > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > We are fairly close - just one last thing to come to consensus on. > >>>> > Remains > >>>> > to be seen how fast INFRA reacts for us though. > >>>> > > >>>> > There will also probably be a bit to do as we work through the first > >>>> > release, in terms of release scripts, docs, etc. I think most of it > >>>> > should > >>>> > be fairly light weight changes though. > >>>> > > >>>> > - Mark > >>>> > -- > >>>> > - Mark > >>>> > about.me/markrmiller > >>>> > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Anshum Gupta > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > -- Anshum Gupta
