Definitely off topic there (sorry!). Thanks for changing the venue for this discussion.
I have never looked up who is on the Thrift PMC, so I don't even know who is part of that and who isn't. But I wonder if there might be an issue of not a large enough PMC if there isn't enough people on it willing to help releases through. Regular committers can prepare/stage release candidates but can't vote on releases, so there isn't really much incentive to initiate them, and the may not feel empowered to help with releases. Releases are primarily a PMC responsibility. So if more releases are desired, there might be a need for more PMC members, or for the current PMC to be more explicit about how non-PMC folks can participate in the release workflow (other than testing and providing non-binding votes). Just something to consider. For what it's worth, you don't actually need to release more frequently to declare additional versions as current or active. You could still make that rare, and only do it for very critical issues. There still might be value in declaring some specific earlier releases as stable and current so people who have specific requirements (like a specific older GCC version or older Java version) know which versions are appropriate to use. Sometimes just opening the door for users a bit more can help grow the contributor base that will eventually help with releasing. Related: is the release prep/staging process automated or documented at all? On Wed, Apr 26, 2023, 16:32 Jens Geyer <jensge...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > this is to continue the slightly offtopic discussion that emerged on > https://github.com/apache/thrift/pull/2785 > > > > > You can still keep up the latest version in any release series > that you consider "currently active". Accumulo has the latest 1.10.x and > 2.1.x right now. Hadoop has the latest 3.3.x, 3.2.x, and 2.10.x. > ZooKeeper has 3.5.x, 3.6.x, 3.7.x, and 3.8.x (they might have a few > extra that they need to remove, as per that INFRA policy, though). The > Thrift PMC could make a similar decision to consider certain versions as > "currently active", even if they are only active for critical fixes. > > > > But that's what we do. The most recent one. > > > Maybe I wasn't clear enough. What I was trying to say is that you > could have more than one release series considered "currently active" > and leave up the most recent of each series. That would still be > compatible with INFRA release distribution policy. > > I understood that. But that's the current policy anyways: We only have > one active version. Of course PMC can change it, but then PMC should > also come up with more people to actually do these releases. Because I > won't. > > Have fun, > > JensG > > > > > >
