Dimitris,
On 11/2/26 8:27 AM, Dimitris Soumis via dev wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2026 at 2:24 PM Rémy Maucherat via dev <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 2, 2026 at 12:41 PM Mark Thomas via dev
<[email protected]> wrote:
All,
The start of the month is here so we should be thinking about tagging
the November releases.
The various AI reviews have resulted in significantly higher numbers of
commits and PRs. There are also a handful of open bugs.
Normally, I'd aim to review all of the commits, resolve the new PRs and
the open bugs before release.
Currently, I am 2-3 weeks behind and I am unsure what to do.
Any BZ issue or PR that relates to an enhancement can wait until the
next release but that still needs those PRs and bugs to be triaged. The
commit reviews are harder. I was hoping that I'd be able to work through
them fairly quickly but that isn't the case. I am finding additional
fixes that are required or regressions quite frequently. Many of these
could be classes as no worse than the original code but there are
occasionally more serious regressions.
Yes, the extra fixes are very useful. It would be better if they were
not needed of course (working on that ...).
Thoughts?
To me, it seems clear that the whole development process has changed.
Therefore, I suggest changing the review process to introduce a risk-based
approach. For committed reviews, maybe focus review on potential
high-impact areas and limit nonessential changes ~1 week before tagging.
If we wanted to take it one step further, it might be worth considering
altering the release cycle from monthly to something more frequent so
reported regressions can be fixed much faster. To reduce the overhead of
this, we could also explore utilizing the Apache Trusted Releases project.
Unfortunately, ATR is more of a nuisance for us at the moment. It does
not streamline any part of our workflow... yet.
AI is accelerating development, and I think our processes should evolve to
accommodate that.
While I agree, I think that things will be settling down somewhat in the
near future.
Do we tag anyway and address regressions as they are reported?
+1
I kind of think we should tag and release as well. I agree with the
"no-worse-than" hypothesis.
-chris
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
