You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@calcite.apache.org by Chunwei Lei <ch...@gmail.com> on 2019/08/01 03:38:13 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Towards Calcite 1.21.0
Thanks for your work, Stamatis!
Besides issues you mentioned above, I wonder if CALCITE-1581
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1581> can be included in
1.21.0.
Best,
Chunwei
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 6:29 AM Stamatis Zampetakis <za...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> We are about three weeks before RC0 and we still have a big number of
> pending PRs.
> Moreover there are only a few Jira cases that are marked to be fixed in
> 1.21.0.
>
> If we assume that we have 10 active committers at the moment and each one
> of them takes on ~5 PRs till the 20th of August,
> we should have at least 50 Jiras marked to be resolved for the next
> version.
>
> I would like to kindly ask people to go through the PRs, select those that
> are going to make it for 1.21.0, and set the fix version accordingly.
>
> At the moment we have resolved 46 issues in Jira [1]. It would be great if
> we could bring this number to 50 by 7th of August.
>
> I've seen that Enrico started another thread about regressions on 1.20.0.
> Let's try to attack this issues first to allow people upgrade to the latest
> release.
>
> Among the issues that we would like to include in 1.21.0, I would like to
> highlight the following:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2302
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3122
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3142
>
> Best,
> Stamatis
>
> [1]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=12333950
>
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 1:56 PM Chunwei Lei <ch...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for release at end of August.
> >
> > > Apart from very important issues it makes sense to treat PRs in FIFO
> > order.
> > Contributors who submit a PR early will certainly get discouraged to
> > contribute again if we never merge these PRs in time.
> >
> > +1 since it is very important for encouraging contributors.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best,
> > Chunwei
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 9:19 AM Danny Chan <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >Apart from very important issues it makes sense to treat PRs in FIFO
> > > order.
> > > Contributors who submit a PR early will certainly get discouraged to
> > > contribute again if we never merge these PRs in time.
> > >
> > > There are 110+ PRs on the GitHub page, what should we do ?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Danny Chan
> > > 在 2019年7月22日 +0800 AM6:19，dev@calcite.apache.org，写道：
> > > >
> > > > Apart from very important issues it makes sense to treat PRs in FIFO
> > > order.
> > > > Contributors who submit a PR early will certainly get discouraged to
> > > > contribute again if we never merge these PRs in time.
> > >
> >
>
AW: [DISCUSS] Towards Calcite 1.21.0
Posted by Julian Feinauer <j....@pragmaticminds.de>.
Hi Stamatis,
Thank you for the overview.
Currently Julian is working on a Pr of mine which does not exactly fix CALCITE-1935 but at least bring in the first support for MATCH_RECOGNIZE which I would consider at list a partial success.
But as the PR is rather big and the branch lived for two years Julian had to comment whether he thinks he can manage it.
Best
JulianF
Von meinem Mobiltelefon gesendet
-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Towards Calcite 1.21.0
Von: Chunwei Lei
An: dev@calcite.apache.org
Cc:
Thanks for your work, Stamatis!
Besides issues you mentioned above, I wonder if CALCITE-1581
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1581> can be included in
1.21.0.
Best,
Chunwei
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 6:29 AM Stamatis Zampetakis <za...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> We are about three weeks before RC0 and we still have a big number of
> pending PRs.
> Moreover there are only a few Jira cases that are marked to be fixed in
> 1.21.0.
>
> If we assume that we have 10 active committers at the moment and each one
> of them takes on ~5 PRs till the 20th of August,
> we should have at least 50 Jiras marked to be resolved for the next
> version.
>
> I would like to kindly ask people to go through the PRs, select those that
> are going to make it for 1.21.0, and set the fix version accordingly.
>
> At the moment we have resolved 46 issues in Jira [1]. It would be great if
> we could bring this number to 50 by 7th of August.
>
> I've seen that Enrico started another thread about regressions on 1.20.0.
> Let's try to attack this issues first to allow people upgrade to the latest
> release.
>
> Among the issues that we would like to include in 1.21.0, I would like to
> highlight the following:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2302
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3122
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3142
>
> Best,
> Stamatis
>
> [1]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=12333950
>
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 1:56 PM Chunwei Lei <ch...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for release at end of August.
> >
> > > Apart from very important issues it makes sense to treat PRs in FIFO
> > order.
> > Contributors who submit a PR early will certainly get discouraged to
> > contribute again if we never merge these PRs in time.
> >
> > +1 since it is very important for encouraging contributors.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best,
> > Chunwei
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 9:19 AM Danny Chan <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >Apart from very important issues it makes sense to treat PRs in FIFO
> > > order.
> > > Contributors who submit a PR early will certainly get discouraged to
> > > contribute again if we never merge these PRs in time.
> > >
> > > There are 110+ PRs on the GitHub page, what should we do ?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Danny Chan
> > > 在 2019年7月22日 +0800 AM6:19，dev@calcite.apache.org，写道：
> > > >
> > > > Apart from very important issues it makes sense to treat PRs in FIFO
> > > order.
> > > > Contributors who submit a PR early will certainly get discouraged to
> > > > contribute again if we never merge these PRs in time.
> > >
> >
>