Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Sorry for the late reply, I was out of office for a while. On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Andrew Pilloud wrote: > It would be good to gather data on who the users will be and what they > expect out of it. Beam users appear to be tech savvy early adopters, and > Enterprise users of that class f

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

It would be good to gather data on who the users will be and what they expect out of it. Beam users appear to be tech savvy early adopters, and Enterprise users of that class frequently maintain their own patch stacks of backported fixes and features off of releases. I've been in that world before

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Hi,I agree that LTS releases are a good thing for users especially because of the argument given by Ahmet (enterprise users). Just 2 comments:- It will require a good amount of backports- The LTS frequency needs to be flexible IMHO but we must make sure the period between two LTS is acceptable. E

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

On 16 Aug 2018, at 21:10, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 7:56 PM Ahmet Altay > wrote: >> I agree with this assessment and the risk. I proposed every Nth as a way to >> keep LTS releases coming out. I was concerned about not making any LTS >> release

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 7:56 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > > Thank you Alexey, Robert for the feedback! > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 5:26 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: >> >> I think this is a worthwhile thing to do. I would just have one change: I >> think that rather than deciding each Nth release is an

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Thank you Alexey, Robert for the feedback! On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 5:26 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > I think this is a worthwhile thing to do. I would just have one change: I > think that rather than deciding each Nth release is an LTS, we should do so > at the time of the release based on the t

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

I think this is a worthwhile thing to do. I would just have one change: I think that rather than deciding each Nth release is an LTS, we should do so at the time of the release based on the time since the last LTS, the number of LTS releases currently in flight, and whether the accumulated feature

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Ahmet, thank you for raising this topic, I think it defenitevly makes sense to have LTS releases, especially for enterprise users. The other potential solution could be patching only last 2-3 releases but, with a goal of 8 releases per year, it might cover quite a short time slice. The only que

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

No, I think that sounds good : ) On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:34 AM Ahmet Altay wrote: > In the PR, I proposed starting with the next (2.7.0) release. I should > have made it more clear. One way of tracking would be having a table, or > perhaps adding this information to the downloads page. Do you

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

In the PR, I proposed starting with the next (2.7.0) release. I should have made it more clear. One way of tracking would be having a table, or perhaps adding this information to the downloads page. Do you have any ideas? On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:28 AM, Pablo Estrada wrote: > Thanks Ahmet for

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Thanks Ahmet for looking into this. I have a follow-up question. Have you thought about the next few releases, and which one will be the first LTS release? Also, how should we track this? -P. On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 11:24 AM Ahmet Altay wrote: > PR is reviewed and merged. Thank you all for the i

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

PR is reviewed and merged. Thank you all for the input. If you did not have a chance to share your feedback, please propose any modifications that you would like to see. I will be more than happy to make changes that would allows us to serve our users better. On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 4:32 PM, Ahmet

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Still waiting for any additional user feedback to come. I added reviewers to the PR. Unless there is objections or additional feedback I would like to go ahead with this version as it is. Modifications after that would always be welcome. On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:06 PM, Rafael Fernandez wrote: >

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

I think this will great for the project! It's worked well for others (such as Ubuntu). I like that this remains compatible with our desire to release every six weeks, while keeping the support/patch load manageable. Release: +1 single process. This is just a statement of what we commit to service.

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

I was not proposing any additional changes to the release process. If we think that release process could be improved it would make sense to apply it to all releases. On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:01 AM, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > Charles, I would keep the process the same with respect to releasing. > >

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Charles, I would keep the process the same with respect to releasing. On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:00 AM Charles Chen wrote: > (sending to the dev@ list thread as this is more relevant here than users@ > ) > > Will we be using a different / potentially more rigorous process for > releasing LTS rel

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

(sending to the dev@ list thread as this is more relevant here than users@) Will we be using a different / potentially more rigorous process for releasing LTS releases? Or do we feel that any validations that could possibly be done should already be incorporated into each release? On Mon, Aug 13

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Update: I sent out an email to user@ to collect their feedback [1]. I will encourage everyone here to collect feedback from the other channels available to you. To facilitate the discussion I drafted my proposal in a PR [2]. Ahmet [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7d890d6ed221c722a95d9c77

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Thanks, I can see the reasoning for LTS releases based upon some enterprise customers needs. Forgot about the 2.1.1 Python release. Thanks for pointing that out. On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 4:47 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > >> I like the ideas th

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Lukasz Cwik wrote: > I like the ideas that your proposing but am wondering what value if any do > supporting LTS releases add? We maintain semantic versioning and I would > expect that most users would be using the latest released version if not > the release jus

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

I like the ideas that your proposing but am wondering what value if any do supporting LTS releases add? We maintain semantic versioning and I would expect that most users would be using the latest released version if not the release just before that. There is likely a long tail of users who will us

Re: [Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

I think this all sounds reasonable, and I think it would be a good story for our users. We don't have much experience with patching releases, but I guess it's a matter of learning and improving over time. -P. On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 9:04 PM Ahmet Altay wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like us to clar

[Discussion] Clarify the support story for released Beam versions

Hi all, I would like us to clarify the life cycle of Beam releases a little bit more for our users. I think we increased the predictability significantly by agreeing to a release cadence and kudos to everyone on that. As a follow up to that I would like to address the following problem: It is unc