You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ratis.apache.org by Tsz Wo Sze <sz...@gmail.com> on 2022/04/26 10:48:04 UTC
[DISCUSS] Release 2.3.0
Hi dev,
There is a discussion in the user@ mailing list about the timeline of
Release 2.3.0; see [1]. It seems a good time to prepare the 2.3.0
release. We should include RATIS-1563 in 2.3.0. Are there any other JIRAs
we should include?
After 2.3.0, we could start working on 3.0.0 so that we can allow
incompatible changes. In particular, we can upgrade dropwizard.metrics
from 3.x to 4.x; see [2].
Regards,
Tsz-Wo
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gtmn8tyx5y64wxyokfqm0kh34dpb400b
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1391
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 2.3.0
Posted by Xinyu Tan <tx...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
we expect Ratis 1570 can be included in the 2.3.0 version, the corresponding PR (https://github.com/apache/ratis/pull/640) is going to be merged
Thanks
> 在 2022年4月26日，下午9:30，Tsz Wo Sze <sz...@gmail.com> 写道：
>
> Hi Attila,
>
> You are right that we should release ratis-thirdparty 1.0.0 first. Thanks
> a lot for volunteering for the task!
>
> There is a make_rc.sh script for building release candidates; see [1].
> Also, you may want to check the Apache Release Policy [2]. Please let me
> know if you have any questions.
>
> Sorry that we do not have a release guideline for the third-party project.
> It would be great if you could document it when you work on the release.
> :) Many thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Tsz-Wo
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/ratis-thirdparty/blob/master/dev-support/make_rc.sh
> [2] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 9:03 PM Attila Doroszlai <ad...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for starting the discussion on a new release.
>>
>>> It seems a good time to prepare the 2.3.0
>>> release. We should include RATIS-1563 in 2.3.0. Are there any other
>> JIRAs
>>> we should include?
>>
>> We should release Ratis Third-party 0.8.0 (or 1.0.0 as we previously
>> discussed) and include it in Ratis 2.3.0.
>>
>> I can volunteer for this task (but will need help as I haven't found a
>> release guideline for the third-party project, only for the main
>> project).
>>
>> -Attila
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 2.3.0
Posted by jackson yao <ja...@gmail.com>.
thanks for the work , i am +1 for the release.
Attila Doroszlai <ad...@apache.org> 于2022年5月6日周五 03:24写道：
> Hi all,
>
> > we should release ratis-thirdparty 1.0.0 first.
>
> Ratis Thirdparty 1.0.0 has been released, and Ratis master branch
> upgraded to it. We can proceed with Ratis 2.3.0 release.
>
> (I have searched the archives for announcements about Ratis Thirdparty
> releases, but haven't found any, so I assume only proper Ratis
> releases need to be announced here.)
>
> -Attila
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 2.3.0
Posted by Attila Doroszlai <ad...@apache.org>.
Hi all,
> we should release ratis-thirdparty 1.0.0 first.
Ratis Thirdparty 1.0.0 has been released, and Ratis master branch
upgraded to it. We can proceed with Ratis 2.3.0 release.
(I have searched the archives for announcements about Ratis Thirdparty
releases, but haven't found any, so I assume only proper Ratis
releases need to be announced here.)
-Attila
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 2.3.0
Posted by Tsz Wo Sze <sz...@gmail.com>.
Hi Attila,
You are right that we should release ratis-thirdparty 1.0.0 first. Thanks
a lot for volunteering for the task!
There is a make_rc.sh script for building release candidates; see [1].
Also, you may want to check the Apache Release Policy [2]. Please let me
know if you have any questions.
Sorry that we do not have a release guideline for the third-party project.
It would be great if you could document it when you work on the release.
:) Many thanks!
Regards,
Tsz-Wo
[1]
https://github.com/apache/ratis-thirdparty/blob/master/dev-support/make_rc.sh
[2] https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 9:03 PM Attila Doroszlai <ad...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Thanks for starting the discussion on a new release.
>
> > It seems a good time to prepare the 2.3.0
> > release. We should include RATIS-1563 in 2.3.0. Are there any other
> JIRAs
> > we should include?
>
> We should release Ratis Third-party 0.8.0 (or 1.0.0 as we previously
> discussed) and include it in Ratis 2.3.0.
>
> I can volunteer for this task (but will need help as I haven't found a
> release guideline for the third-party project, only for the main
> project).
>
> -Attila
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 2.3.0
Posted by Attila Doroszlai <ad...@apache.org>.
Thanks for starting the discussion on a new release.
> It seems a good time to prepare the 2.3.0
> release. We should include RATIS-1563 in 2.3.0. Are there any other JIRAs
> we should include?
We should release Ratis Third-party 0.8.0 (or 1.0.0 as we previously
discussed) and include it in Ratis 2.3.0.
I can volunteer for this task (but will need help as I haven't found a
release guideline for the third-party project, only for the main
project).
-Attila
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 2.3.0
Posted by Attila Doroszlai <ad...@apache.org>.
> We should include RATIS-1563 in 2.3.0. Are there any other JIRAs we should include?
While trying the first few steps of the release process locally, I
have found and fixed two minor, but blocker issues (RATIS-1575 and
RATIS-1576). I think the current master at 9395b12c is good for
starting the release.
I would like to volunteer as release manager for Ratis 2.3.0.
-Attila
Re: [DISCUSS] Release 2.3.0
Posted by mingchao zhao <ca...@apache.org>.
Thanks @Tsz-Wo for your proposal.
Agree to release 2.3.0.
There are many good features that have been merged in the master. Such as
RATIS-1545 can improve ozone write performance by 20%. We need a new
version of ratis before ozone release.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 6:48 PM Tsz Wo Sze <sz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi dev,
>
> There is a discussion in the user@ mailing list about the timeline of
> Release 2.3.0; see [1]. It seems a good time to prepare the 2.3.0
> release. We should include RATIS-1563 in 2.3.0. Are there any other JIRAs
> we should include?
>
> After 2.3.0, we could start working on 3.0.0 so that we can allow
> incompatible changes. In particular, we can upgrade dropwizard.metrics
> from 3.x to 4.x; see [2].
>
> Regards,
> Tsz-Wo
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gtmn8tyx5y64wxyokfqm0kh34dpb400b
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RATIS-1391
>