Re: [DISCUSS] EOL 4.16 and 4.x?

[Viraj Jasani <vj...@apache.org>]

+ user@phoenix

On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 2:17 PM, Viraj Jasani <vj...@apache.org> wrote:

> All Phoenix devs/users (in addition to SFDC and Cloudera), please feel
> free to provide your opinions on whether you are using 4.x versions and
> what your future plans look like, what category of issues you are facing
> (if any) from stable features provided by Apache Phoenix 4.x.
> Your opinions are most welcome and would really help the community
> determine the direction of the project and release management.
>
>
> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 12:28 PM, Viraj Jasani <vj...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I agree, EOL schedule is more important as we prepare to move to Phoenix
>> 5.
>> We are going to initiate official discussion for the upcoming big
>> features e.g dual cluster support and where it fits well (as discussed over
>> slack by Daniel).
>>
>> As far as 4.16 is concerned, IMHO we should prefer retiring it sooner
>> than 4.x. Unless critical bugs are discovered, 4.16.1 could be the last
>> release in 4.16 release line. Hopefully, we will have better answers in
>> coming days.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 11:52 AM, Istvan Toth <st...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I am looking forward to less backports, and I want to use Java 8 features
>>> freely as much as the next developer.
>>>
>>> However, I'm going to play the devil's advocate here, and spell out what
>>> Ankit hinted at:
>>>
>>> We know that SFDC is the main contributor, and probably also the single
>>> largest user of Phoenix, and that they still use 4.x in production.
>>> Dropping 4.x and causing SFDC to maintain their production branch
>>> internally may not be in the best  interest of the Apache project,
>>> as it may divert SFDC resources from the public branches, and may result
>>> in
>>> delaying or even missing fixes there.
>>>
>>> I think that it would be useful to know what EOL schedule would work best
>>> for SFDC, and align our plans with that.
>>>
>>> Perhaps Lars or someone else from SFDC could share their "official"
>>> opinion, and help set an EOL schedule that works for everyone.
>>>
>>> Istvan
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30 PM Ankit Singhal <ankitsinghal59@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > +1 for EOL'ing 4.x branches.
>>> >
>>> > As Josh and I, share the feedback from the same set of users,
>>> > it would still be a good idea to hear from others but as it's been
>>> already
>>> > been 12 days since your first mail out, just a notice can be given for
>>> > 72hrs(?)
>>> > before dropping the next 4.x versions from JIRA and cleaning branches
>>> in
>>> > case any volunteer comes up to maintain these branches.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 9:27 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > No objections over here! Y'all already know the work Istvan and
>>> Richard
>>> > > have been doing to push on Phoenix 5.1. That continues to be our
>>> focus.
>>> > >
>>> > > On 5/7/21 11:13 AM, Viraj Jasani wrote:
>>> > > > Hi,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Based on HBase community's decision to EOL branch-1 after 1.7.0
>>> release
>>> > > as
>>> > > > per the discussion thread [1], it is inevitable that we will also
>>> have
>>> > to
>>> > > > consider EOL of 4.x release line sometime soon.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > As we have discussed in the past, even though Phoenix 4.x should
>>> > support
>>> > > > Java 7 only (as it supports HBase 1), we are not strictly following
>>> > this
>>> > > > compatibility. With HBase 2 / Phoenix 5, we no longer have to worry
>>> > about
>>> > > > this source compatibility. Tephra also continues to support HBase
>>> 1 and
>>> > > > hence should follow Java 7 source compatibility rules and yet I see
>>> > many
>>> > > > Java 8 Optional imports in tephra-hbase-compat-2.x modules. Source
>>> > > > compatibility is just one of the reasons behind HBase community's
>>> > > decision
>>> > > > to EOL branch-1, many other important reasons are discussed over
>>> thread
>>> > > [1].
>>> > > > Overall, HBase 2 is already widely adopted and deployed in
>>> production
>>> > and
>>> > > > so should be Phoenix 5 IMHO.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Given that there are no apparent functional differences b/ 4.16 and
>>> > > 5.1(and
>>> > > > master) except for maybe few pending forward-ports (if any), I
>>> believe
>>> > it
>>> > > > is worth considering the ongoing 4.16 patch release as the last
>>> one on
>>> > > 4.x
>>> > > > release line and EOL 4.16 and 4.x.
>>> > > > Thoughts?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > 1. https://s.apache.org/rs2bk
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>