Re: [DISCUSS] branch-1
Closing out the JIRAs as "Auto Closed" or "Closed due to Inactivity" seems reasonable to me. For branch-1, we can be more aggressive. We should probably do the same less aggressively for other branches too. On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Arun C Murthy wrote: > +1 > > Arun > > On May 8, 2015, at 10:41 AM, Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > > > > May we declare this branch dead and just close bugs (but not > necessarily concepts, ideas, etc) with won’t fix? I don’t think anyone has > any intention of working on the 1.3 release, especially given that 1.2.1 > was Aug 2013 …. > > > > I guess we need a PMC member to declare a vote or whatever…. > > > > > > -- Karthik Kambatla Software Engineer, Cloudera Inc. http://five.sentenc.es
Re: [DISCUSS] branch-1
+1 Arun On May 8, 2015, at 10:41 AM, Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > May we declare this branch dead and just close bugs (but not > necessarily concepts, ideas, etc) with won’t fix? I don’t think anyone has > any intention of working on the 1.3 release, especially given that 1.2.1 was > Aug 2013 …. > > I guess we need a PMC member to declare a vote or whatever…. > >
Re: [DISCUSS] branch-1
I would be -1 to declaring the branch dead just yet. There have been 7 commits to that branch this year. I know this isn't comparable to trunk or branch-2, but it is not negligible either. I propose we come up with a policy for deprecating past major release branches. May be, something along the lines of - deprecate branch-x when release x+3.0.0 goes GA? On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Allen Wittenauer wrote: > > May we declare this branch dead and just close bugs (but not > necessarily concepts, ideas, etc) with won’t fix? I don’t think anyone has > any intention of working on the 1.3 release, especially given that 1.2.1 > was Aug 2013 …. > > I guess we need a PMC member to declare a vote or whatever…. > > > -- Karthik Kambatla Software Engineer, Cloudera Inc. http://five.sentenc.es
[DISCUSS] branch-1
May we declare this branch dead and just close bugs (but not necessarily concepts, ideas, etc) with won’t fix? I don’t think anyone has any intention of working on the 1.3 release, especially given that 1.2.1 was Aug 2013 …. I guess we need a PMC member to declare a vote or whatever….
Re: [DISCUSS] branch-1
I think it would be fine to "auto-close" most remaining branch-1 issues even if the branch is still formally considered alive. I don't expect us to create a new 1.x release unless a security vulnerability or critical bug forces it. Closing all non-critical issues would match with the reality that no one is actively developing for the branch, but there would still be the option of filing new critical bugs if someone decides that they want a new 1.x release. --Chris Nauroth On 5/8/15, 10:50 AM, "Karthik Kambatla" wrote: >I would be -1 to declaring the branch dead just yet. There have been 7 >commits to that branch this year. I know this isn't comparable to trunk or >branch-2, but it is not negligible either. > >I propose we come up with a policy for deprecating past major release >branches. May be, something along the lines of - deprecate branch-x when >release x+3.0.0 goes GA? > > > >On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Allen Wittenauer >wrote: > >> >> May we declare this branch dead and just close bugs (but not >> necessarily concepts, ideas, etc) with won¹t fix? I don¹t think anyone >>has >> any intention of working on the 1.3 release, especially given that 1.2.1 >> was Aug 2013 Š. >> >> I guess we need a PMC member to declare a vote or whateverŠ. >> >> >> > > >-- >Karthik Kambatla >Software Engineer, Cloudera Inc. > >http://five.sentenc.es
