I was under the impression we can always go to 0.10+ if we're not ready :)

Tim

On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1
>
> Optiq has been “approximately monthly”, and that seems to have worked well. 
> We weren’t tied to a particular date, so we could use our discretion to slip 
> a bit if making a release wasn’t convenient.
>
> Now Optiq faces a different crunch… the next release will be 0.9, so there 
> will be an expectation that the release after that will be “the big one”, 
> i.e. 1.0. If you’re on a “early and often” cycle, no release feels like “the 
> big one”. Hopefully you will feel like you’re at 1.0 quality well before 
> December.
>
> Julian
>
> On Jul 24, 2014, at 9:16 AM, Parth Chandra <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1 for monthly releases.
>> We could follow the Ubuntu model and use the number of the month for the
>> minor version number .
>> 0.07 for July, 0.08 for Aug, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Yash Sharma <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> +1. Would really love to see a release.
>>> It would be great if we can have prioritized JIRA's - labelled with 0.4 and
>>> we can focus solely on those for this week.
>>>
>>> Peace,
>>> Yash
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Everybody,
>>>>
>>>> It has been too long since our last release.  So much good stuff has been
>>>> done in master but we have no release with which people can experiment.
>>> We
>>>> need to do a better job of releasing early and often.  I think the
>>> monthly
>>>> cycle that Optiq and Spark uses works very well and propose we move to
>>> that
>>>> model.
>>>>
>>>> To kick this off, I propose we do a release next week that is our first
>>>> development point release that supports distributed execution.  There are
>>>> probably a dozen outstanding patches that would be good to get into this
>>>> release and I'd like to try to target those but ultimately time-bound the
>>>> release.
>>>>
>>>> With releasing comes a discussion of version numbers.  While we initially
>>>> started out with a milestone versioning scheme, the feedback I've
>>> received
>>>> is that it doesn't fit what people expect.  As such, I propose moving to
>>> a
>>>> more traditional point release scheme.
>>>>
>>>> I think that we're probably a month or so away from a good beta release
>>>> which I think would fairly be considered a 0.5 release.  As such, I
>>> propose
>>>> that we release 0.4 next week and then increment each month, targeting a
>>>> 1.0 release towards the end of the year.
>>>>
>>>> In summary, my release proposal is to target something similar to:
>>>> July: 0.4 (dev preview)
>>>> August: 0.5 (beta)
>>>> September: 0.6
>>>> Oct: 0.7
>>>> ...
>>>> EOY: 1.0 (ga)
>>>>
>>>> I think this more frequent release will help users to understand what
>>> Drill
>>>> is all about and let them start to experiment with their workloads.  This
>>>> should also drive additional community engagement and new contributions
>>>> which is what this is all about.
>>>>
>>>> thanks,
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>
>

Reply via email to