Hi Yunze,
Thanks for bringing this discussion.
I agree that there must be some step to remind everybody that a code
freeze is coming and that people should pay attention to their open
PRs if they want them included.
In a sense Zike's mail one week ago did this and was pretty clear on
what was
Hi, Yunze,
Thanks for raising this discussion. It's good to have the phase to
proceed with the PR reviewing and merging before the code freeze.
> But the release managers should address the PRs actively.
> They can help review the PRs. Or at least,
I think we should separate these two roles:
Hi Yunze,
Thank you for bringing up this critical issue regarding pending PRs before
the code freeze. I appreciate your thoughtful insights and suggestions.
I'd like to share my thoughts on this. In previous releases, we didn't have
a formal code freeze announcement; instead, we had a discussion
To be more specific, we can send a discussion thread one week before
the code freeze. Then,
1. The PRs opened after the time point won't be considered to be
included in this release
2. If someone has some pending PRs that are aimed to be included in
this release, it's better to comment in the
Hi community,
I see the code freeze of Pulsar 3.0.0 is coming tomorrow. But I found
the release process still lacks a key step that pending PRs should be
taken carefully of instead of simply delaying them to the next
release.
The following cases were very often seen:
1. A PR has opened for some
