> By the way the main point in this email thread is that we should totally stop to do cherry-picks of stuff that it is not strictly needed
Yes, the main issue we need to resolve is how we can define if the stuff strictly needed to cherry-pick. Do you think the author to provide the cherry-pick information or reviewers to add labels and confirm the label is correct before merging it is a good way? Who wants to update the release/* label, the context is required. Do not only change the release label without any information. Or, push PR for every cherry-pick to get approved by committers. Thanks, Penghui On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 6:32 PM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > Il giorno mar 28 feb 2023 alle ore 11:19 Yubiao Feng > <yubiao.f...@streamnative.io.invalid> ha scritto: > > > > Append asuggestion: > > - After a PR revert, we need to remove the label named "release-xxx", > which > > can alleviate the release manager's work > > I think that it is up to the committer who merges the patch to > cherry-pick immediately to the other branches. > At that point you have enough context to merge the patch and for sure > the committer knows the patch well. > > In Apache BookKeeper and in Apache ZooKeeper we have a script that > does the merge against the target branch and > then it allows you to cherry-pick the other branches. > > Delaying the merge too much makes things harder. > > By the way the main point in this email thread is that we should > totally stop to do cherry-picks of stuff that it is > not strictly needed > > > Enrico > > > > > Thanks > > Yubiao Feng > > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 11:27 PM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello Committers, > > > I believe that we should stop cherry-picking breaking changes like [1] > > > to released branches. > > > Really, this is something that we cannot do. > > > > > > When you decide to cherry-pick a commit to a "stable branch", > > > currently branch-2.8, branch-2.9, branch-2.10 and branch-2.11 you > > > always have to think about these things: > > > - is it a breaking change ? > > > - is it really needed ? > > > - could it mine the stability of the branch ? > > > > > > The answer is usually that you can cherry-pick a change only if it > > > falls into these categories: > > > - there is a security hole to fix (in this case the PMC has to deal > > > with it, and usually this is done not publicly) > > > - there is a bad bug that cause data loss or other serious problems > > > > > > I have sent this message a few other times in the past. > > > We, the Pulsar community, are responsible for the stability of the > > > project and product that our users use in production. > > > > > > Even if you think that something that could "improve the performance" > > > or "do something better" is appealing you always have to keep in mind > > > that the risk of breaking something that is stable is too high in > > > respect to the gain in terms of performances or anything else. > > > > > > Improvements should go only to the master branch, and users will > > > benefit from them when we will cut a release. > > > > > > This is a free OSS project on which many users count on. > > > > > > If you are eager to see a performance improvement in your system, then > > > this is fine, > > > this is OSS and you can legally have a fork and cherry-pick the > > > patches and build it on your own. > > > This is the reason why OSS is cool. > > > But if you are able to cherry-pick a patch you are also able to > > > maintain your fork and fix any problems if the patch caused a > > > regression. > > > > > > Most of the consumers of OSS products rely on us because they don't > > > have enough engineering resources to maintain such a project by > > > themselves. > > > > > > They trust us and they won't scan a list of tens of commits in order > > > to double check if the upgrade will change the behaviour of their > > > applications. > > > > > > This is Pulsar momentum, let's do our best to fulfill the expectations > > > of the companies that are adopting our project. > > > > > > Enrico > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/19640#pullrequestreview-1315805022 > > > >
