Hi Adnan,

PR 4860 is not a feature. I read it as a bug fix.

Cheers,
Dmitri.

On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 5:48 PM Adnan Hemani via dev <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Dmitri,
>
> While I understand we will need a new RC - I'd be very careful about
> setting the precedent of adding new features between RC cycles. Generally,
> unless the new code fixes the reason an RC failed, I'm not sure I agree
> with adding new code in between RCs.
>
> Would love to hear the community's thoughts on this!
>
> Best,
> Adnan Hemani
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 2:05 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi EJ,
> >
> > Thanks for cutting RC0!
> >
> > While it is unfortunate that RC0 had issues (with the Spark plugin IIRC),
> > now that some extra changes seem necessary anyway, I wonder if we could
> > include [4860] into RC1? WDYT?
> >
> > [4860] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4860
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dmitri.
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 1:16 PM EJ Wang <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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