Hi all,

Quick update on the Apache Polaris 1.6.0 branch cut.

The release workflow/documentation updates that were called out earlier
have now landed on main:

- #4626: release-4 updates previous versioned-docs binary dist URLs to
archive
- #4650: release workflow 4 drops dist release SVN writes and documents the
manual PMC dev -> release move

I have not seen any additional 1.6.0 blockers or must-have PRs called out
on this thread.

The current main HEAD is green, and I plan to use it as the 1.6.0 cutoff: *Add
external Polaris server test manager (#4843)*

Unless there are last-minute objections, I will proceed with creating the
1.6.0 release branch from this commit and start preparing the first release
candidate.

Thanks,
-ej

On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 5:09 PM EJ Wang <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Quick update on the 1.6.0 branch cut:
>
>    - Adnan's requested release workflow fix, #4626, has now landed on
>    main. Thanks Adnan and reviewers.
>    - The current main HEAD is: InMemoryBufferEventListener: fix cache
>    removal logic and flaky test (#4677
>    <https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4677>)
>    - I checked the current HEAD and the required checks are green. I have
>    not seen any other PRs called out on this thread as must-have blockers for
>    1.6.0.
>
> The one remaining release-process PR I am watching is #4650, which
> documents/moves the dist dev -> dist release SVN steps to a manual PMC
> action after the vote. It is mergeable and green, but still pending
> review/merge. If #4650 lands shortly, I plan to use the main commit
> immediately after #4650 as the final 1.6.0 cutoff. Otherwise, I plan to
> proceed from the current green main HEAD above and keep coordinating the
> manual post-vote steps with PMC help.
>
> Please call out any objections or must-have PRs soon; otherwise I will
> proceed with preparing the 1.6.0 release branch/RC from that cutoff.
>
> Thanks,
> -ej
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 12:44 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thanks to both of you for the review and updates. I will perform a pass on
>> the PR now so we can move forward with the 1.6.0 release as planned.
>>
>> Regards,
>> JB
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 6:33 PM EJ Wang <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks Adnan! this makes sense to get in before the branch cut. The
>> > workflow placement looks good to me, and updating the superseded
>> versioned
>> > docs during release publication should prevent old binary distribution
>> > links from breaking after cleanup.
>> >
>> > I left one small question about preserving the incubator archive path
>> for
>> > older incubating release docs. Otherwise LGTM.
>> >
>> > -ej
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 4:00 PM Adnan Hemani via dev <
>> > [email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I would say, we should wait for this PR to land before we branch cut.
>> > This
>> > > will help us solve an issue we've had for a while that no one
>> reported:
>> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4626/changes. If we don't take
>> > this
>> > > PR into 1.6.0, then fixing this issue will likely have to wait until
>> > 1.7.0
>> > > - which keeps all historical release links broken in the meantime.
>> > >
>> > > Best,
>> > > Adnan Hemani
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 3:16 PM EJ Wang <
>> [email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Thanks, JB! Reviewed and approved.
>> > > >
>> > > > All,
>> > > > I have not seen any specific must-have PRs or release blockers
>> called
>> > out
>> > > > for 1.6.0.
>> > > >
>> > > > Unless there are objections, I plan to use the current main branch
>> > after
>> > > > the release workflow/documentation update in #4650 lands as the
>> cutoff
>> > > > point for 1.6.0. Concretely, I will cut the release branch from the
>> > main
>> > > > commit immediately after #4650 is merged.
>> > > >
>> > > > If anyone has a must-have PR that should be included in 1.6.0,
>> please
>> > > call
>> > > > it out on this thread by <date/time>. Otherwise, I will proceed with
>> > that
>> > > > cutoff and start preparing the first RC.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > -ej
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 9:21 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> [email protected]>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hi
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Following this discussion, I updated the release process and
>> > > > documentation:
>> > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4650
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Regards
>> > > > > JB
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 11:02 PM EJ Wang <
>> > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > Thanks Dmitri, Yufei, and JB.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I will keep moving forward with the June 26 target then.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Thanks JB and Yufei for offering to help with the PMC-only
>> > post-vote
>> > > > > steps.
>> > > > > > I will coordinate with you when we get closer to the
>> > RC/vote/publish
>> > > > > > stages.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > For #4579, I will add it to the release tracker and watch the
>> > related
>> > > > > PRs.
>> > > > > > Given the discussion so far, I will treat it as something we
>> should
>> > > try
>> > > > > to
>> > > > > > resolve before cutting the RC, but not necessarily a hard
>> blocker
>> > > > unless
>> > > > > > others feel strongly that it should block 1.6.0.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > > -ej
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 9:43 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Thanks for filing the issue. It's great to have it. I'm OK to
>> > > > consider
>> > > > > > 4579
>> > > > > > > either a blocker or non-blocker, as we have made releases
>> without
>> > > it
>> > > > > > > multiple times. I can also help with PMC duty.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Yufei
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 10:48 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>> > > > [email protected]
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Hi EJ,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > This plan sounds good to me. Thanks for volunteering!
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I have created
>> https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/4579,
>> > as
>> > > > the
>> > > > > > > > release workflow and documentation need to be updated. I am
>> > > > currently
>> > > > > > > > working on this, and it should be considered a release
>> blocker.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Additionally, you will need the assistance of a PMC member
>> to
>> > > > > complete
>> > > > > > > > the post-vote release steps. I will be happy to help you
>> with
>> > > that
>> > > > > > > > process.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards,
>> > > > > > > > JB
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 9:16 PM EJ Wang <
>> > > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I would like to volunteer as the release manager for
>> Apache
>> > > > Polaris
>> > > > > > > > 1.6.0.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I am thinking about targeting Friday, June 26, 2026 for
>> the
>> > > > > release,
>> > > > > > > > > assuming the community agrees and we do not have blocking
>> > > issues
>> > > > by
>> > > > > > > then.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > To start planning, could folks please share if there are
>> any:
>> > > > > > > > > - release blockers for 1.6.0
>> > > > > > > > > - must-have PRs that should be included
>> > > > > > > > > - timing concerns around the proposed date
>> > > > > > > > > - areas where you would like to help validate the release
>> > > > candidate
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Based on the previous 1.5.0 release flow, my rough plan
>> is:
>> > > > > > > > > - collect blockers and must-have PRs over the next couple
>> of
>> > > > weeks
>> > > > > > > > > - start converging the scope around mid-June
>> > > > > > > > > - prepare the changelog/release notes and cut the first RC
>> > > around
>> > > > > > June
>> > > > > > > 20
>> > > > > > > > > - keep the vote open for at least 72 hours
>> > > > > > > > > - publish and announce the release around June 26 if the
>> vote
>> > > > > passes
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I will also keep an eye on release workflow/artifact
>> > > validation,
>> > > > > > > > including
>> > > > > > > > > source artifacts, Maven artifacts, Docker images, Helm
>> chart,
>> > > > > Python
>> > > > > > > > > package, and the website/downloads page.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Please let me know if this timeline sounds reasonable, or
>> if
>> > > > there
>> > > > > > are
>> > > > > > > > > concerns I should account for.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > > > > > -ej
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to