Hi, Yes, please delay! The code is not yet releasable without further testing and API cleanups. That's my personal opinion, but others might have the same impression. A major release like 6.0 always needs some time for the pre-release cleanup, like deprecated APIs, API problems,... We should really reserve some time to "stop" adding new features and only fix bugs and API hickups. I wish, I could help, but I am unfortunately very busy at the moment.
Uwe ----- Uwe Schindler H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael McCandless [mailto:luc...@mikemccandless.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 11:13 AM > To: Lucene/Solr dev <dev@lucene.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [Possibly spoofed] Re: Lucene/Solr 6.0.0 Release Branch > > Hi Nick, > > Since we are still finding a number of bad bugs (!!) in the new > dimensional points, e.g. equals was broken on the range query, the set > query for InetAddress didn't work, exceptions on merging sparse > fields, etc., and since at least e.g. Rob is working hard on cutting > over legacy numerics usage to points, I think we should delay cutting > the RC for now? Once the severity of the issues settles down I think > it will become clearer that we're ready for the first RC? > > Thank you for being RM! > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Nicholas Knize <nkn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is a heads up that I will be starting the release process no earlier > > than 24 hours from now. Thanks to everyone in advance for their help > during > > this process. > > > > - Nick > > > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 3:30 AM, Vanlerberghe, Luc > > <luc.vanlerber...@bvdinfo.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> > >> > >> I added two JIRA issues (Lucene: > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7078, Solr: > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-8802 ) concerning Query > classes > >> that are still mutable and should either become immutable, marked as > >> @lucene.experimental or get a comment why it’s not an issue for that > case. > >> > >> > >> > >> Since they are part of the public API, I think now is the time to update > >> them. > >> > >> > >> > >> I already converted MultiPhraseQuery > >> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7064: reviewed and > committed > >> by Adrien Grand). > >> > >> > >> > >> Luc Vanlerberghe > >> > >> > >> > >> From: Joel Bernstein [mailto:joels...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: maandag 7 maart 2016 21:08 > >> To: lucene dev > >> Subject: [Possibly spoofed] Re: Lucene/Solr 6.0.0 Release Branch > >> > >> > >> > >> "Major API and bug fixes (no features) can be committed without my > >> approval before Friday as long as they're reviewed and approved by > another > >> committer." > >> > >> > >> > >> Hmmm, are there really major API changes underway at this point? As far > as > >> bug fixes needing another committer approval is not something we've > done in > >> the past. > >> > >> > >> Joel Bernstein > >> > >> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Nicholas Knize <nkn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> I think with all of the volatility surrounding the new Points codec that > >> obvious bug/stability patches like these are OK? I know several folks have > >> been working feverishly the past few days to fix serious (and simplify) 6.0 > >> issues and squash all of the jenkins failures to ensure stability in time > >> for the major release. That being said, you're right that we don't want > >> chaotic committing as we lead up to the release. > >> > >> > >> > >> So unless there are no objections I'll plan to move forward and start the > >> release process this Friday. Until then, since this is a major release, as > >> many people we can get to scrutinize and stabilize 6_0 over the next 3-4 > >> days the better. Major API and bug fixes (no features) can be committed > >> without my approval before Friday as long as they're reviewed and > approved > >> by another committer. If there is any uncertainty ping me on this thread > or > >> the corresponding issue and I'll review. I will also send out an email 24 > >> hours before I start the release process. > >> > >> > >> > >> - Nick > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:04 AM, david.w.smi...@gmail.com > >> <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> I just want to clarify you(Nick) / our expectations about this release > >> branch. It seems, based on issues I've seen like LUCENE-7072, that we can > >> commit to the release branch without your permission as RM. If this is > >> true, then I presume the tacit approval is okay so long as it's not a new > >> feature. Right? > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 3:23 PM Nicholas Knize <nkn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> With the release of 5.5 and the previous discussion re: 6.0.0 I'd like to > >> keep the ball moving and volunteer as the 6.0.0 RM. > >> > >> > >> > >> If there are no objections my plan is to cut branch_6_0 early next week - > >> Mon or Tues. Please mark blocker issues accordingly and/or let me know > if > >> there are any commits needed before cutting the branch. > >> > >> > >> > >> - Nick > >> > >> -- > >> > >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > >> > >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: > >> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
