I think master is mostly slated for 4.0 at this point, so any 3.1
and/or 3.0.1 releases would probably have to be backports unless we're
willing to consider 3.1 a "next major release" for things like
removing the legacy Traffic Ops Perl UI. I think that was at least one
thing that was basically committed to 4.0, but there might be other
stuff too.

That said, it's hard to justify doing a release without considering
what we'd like to get into the potential release. For example, is
there a major bugfix that warrants a 3.0.1 and/or a new feature in
master that should be backported into a 3.1 release rather than
waiting until we cut master into 4.0?

- Rawlin

On Mon, Mar 4, 2019 at 11:26 AM Fieck, Brennan
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> To perhaps help us push out releases in a more timely fashion, maybe we 
> should start making release Milestones?
> We've had them in the past: 
> https://github.com/apache/trafficcontrol/milestones I don't think deciding on 
> what we
>
> want in 4.0.0 is realistic right now, but we could certainly start planning 
> for 3.0.1 and even 3.1.0. Adding issues to fix
>
> or Pull Requests to include would probably be a voting process (a cursory 
> reading of the ASF release candidate
>
> process suggests that the votes for merely planning a release need not be 
> "binding", though I could very well be
>
> wrong about that). Honestly, for a patch version we should probably only look 
> at things that are actually done,
>
> whereas for a minor version release we'd want to plan on including fixes for 
> extant problems and including functionality
>
> that may not be written today.
>
>
> Making sure everything that goes into a release is tracked by a milestone as 
> progress is made will also simplify
>
> checking the changelog for everything that should be there/maybe even 
> generating the changelog from the milestone.
>
>
> I don't have the authority to create milestones, which suggests that even 
> doing that requires a vote from the community
>
> before any committers feel obligated to do anything. I'm +1 on creating 
> milestones for 3.1.0 and 3.0.1, and if and
>
> when voting on those commences I have some candidates for inclusion in each 
> to propose.

Reply via email to