You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@pulsar.apache.org by Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> on 2022/01/03 18:05:48 UTC
Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Hello,
We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
We must declare 2.6 EOF.
IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the Pulsar
project.
So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not cut
releases for a few important bugs.
Thoughts?
Enrico
Re: [LAZY CONSENSUS] Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Posted by Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>.
Good.
I will send an email to user@pulsar.apache.org that states the EOL
status for 2.6
Enrico
Il giorno lun 10 gen 2022 alle ore 19:26 Chris Herzog
<ch...@tibco.com.invalid> ha scritto:
>
> I agree with 2.6 EOL.
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 2:35 AM Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This thread is now to moving branch-2.6 (the Pulsar 2.6 release line)
> > to End-Of-Life status
> >
> > What EOL means here:
> > - No more releases, even for security bugs
> > - No cherry-picks to branch-2.6
> >
> > We will apply the Lazy Consensus rules
> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus
> >
> > If no-one objects within 72 hours I will send an official announcement
> > of the EOL status of 2.6.
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> > Il giorno mar 4 gen 2022 alle ore 06:04 Michael Marshall
> > <mm...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> > >
> > > I agree with Dave. Lazy consensus gives us exactly what we need: to
> > > know if someone would like branch-2.6 to stay alive. If no one
> > > responds that they need it within the time period, then no one needs
> > > it.
> > >
> > > PIP 47 briefly mentions our EOL policy, but the policy doesn't cover
> > > our current case where we released fewer than 4 minor versions in a
> > > year. I think we'd benefit from clarifying and improving our
> > > documentation for our EOL policy.
> > >
> > > > This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been
> > involved with during the last 14 years.
> > >
> > > The new PIP process, with its increased purview, has increased the
> > > number of votes. I have appreciated the increased development
> > > discussion on the ML, but maybe the discussions (especially the ones
> > > that look like votes) and then the subsequent votes are leading to the
> > > high vote volume.
> > >
> > > We could update the PIP process so that DISCUSSIONS without any
> > > pushback during a certain time period do not need VOTES.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Michael
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 6:00 PM Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been
> > involved with during the last 14 years.
> > > >
> > > > For most projects lazy consensus applies:
> > https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus
> > > >
> > > > We also tend to “vote” during discussions which does not really
> > advance a conversation.
> > > >
> > > > If we want to have a VOTE then there are good reasons to start it NOW.
> > > >
> > > > All the Best,
> > > > Dave
> > > >
> > > > > On Jan 3, 2022, at 3:48 PM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Agree to have a vote to keep a record.
> > > > >
> > > > > - Sijie
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:40 PM 陳智弘 <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be
> > better
> > > > >> to the community.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道：
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Hello,
> > > > >>>> We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> We must declare 2.6 EOF.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the
> > > > >> Pulsar
> > > > >>>> project.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not
> > cut
> > > > >>>> releases for a few important bugs.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Thoughts?
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Enrico
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
> Chris Herzog Messaging Team | O 630 300 7718 | M 815 263 3764 |
> www.tibco.com
>
> <http://www.tibco.com/>
Re: [LAZY CONSENSUS] Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Posted by Chris Herzog <ch...@tibco.com.INVALID>.
I agree with 2.6 EOL.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 2:35 AM Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This thread is now to moving branch-2.6 (the Pulsar 2.6 release line)
> to End-Of-Life status
>
> What EOL means here:
> - No more releases, even for security bugs
> - No cherry-picks to branch-2.6
>
> We will apply the Lazy Consensus rules
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus
>
> If no-one objects within 72 hours I will send an official announcement
> of the EOL status of 2.6.
>
> Enrico
>
>
> Il giorno mar 4 gen 2022 alle ore 06:04 Michael Marshall
> <mm...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> >
> > I agree with Dave. Lazy consensus gives us exactly what we need: to
> > know if someone would like branch-2.6 to stay alive. If no one
> > responds that they need it within the time period, then no one needs
> > it.
> >
> > PIP 47 briefly mentions our EOL policy, but the policy doesn't cover
> > our current case where we released fewer than 4 minor versions in a
> > year. I think we'd benefit from clarifying and improving our
> > documentation for our EOL policy.
> >
> > > This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been
> involved with during the last 14 years.
> >
> > The new PIP process, with its increased purview, has increased the
> > number of votes. I have appreciated the increased development
> > discussion on the ML, but maybe the discussions (especially the ones
> > that look like votes) and then the subsequent votes are leading to the
> > high vote volume.
> >
> > We could update the PIP process so that DISCUSSIONS without any
> > pushback during a certain time period do not need VOTES.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 6:00 PM Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been
> involved with during the last 14 years.
> > >
> > > For most projects lazy consensus applies:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus
> > >
> > > We also tend to “vote” during discussions which does not really
> advance a conversation.
> > >
> > > If we want to have a VOTE then there are good reasons to start it NOW.
> > >
> > > All the Best,
> > > Dave
> > >
> > > > On Jan 3, 2022, at 3:48 PM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Agree to have a vote to keep a record.
> > > >
> > > > - Sijie
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:40 PM 陳智弘 <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be
> better
> > > >> to the community.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道：
> > > >>
> > > >>> I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com
> >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Hello,
> > > >>>> We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> We must declare 2.6 EOF.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the
> > > >> Pulsar
> > > >>>> project.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not
> cut
> > > >>>> releases for a few important bugs.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Thoughts?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Enrico
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
>
--
Chris Herzog Messaging Team | O 630 300 7718 | M 815 263 3764 |
www.tibco.com
<http://www.tibco.com/>
[LAZY CONSENSUS] Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Posted by Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>.
This thread is now to moving branch-2.6 (the Pulsar 2.6 release line)
to End-Of-Life status
What EOL means here:
- No more releases, even for security bugs
- No cherry-picks to branch-2.6
We will apply the Lazy Consensus rules
https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus
If no-one objects within 72 hours I will send an official announcement
of the EOL status of 2.6.
Enrico
Il giorno mar 4 gen 2022 alle ore 06:04 Michael Marshall
<mm...@apache.org> ha scritto:
>
> I agree with Dave. Lazy consensus gives us exactly what we need: to
> know if someone would like branch-2.6 to stay alive. If no one
> responds that they need it within the time period, then no one needs
> it.
>
> PIP 47 briefly mentions our EOL policy, but the policy doesn't cover
> our current case where we released fewer than 4 minor versions in a
> year. I think we'd benefit from clarifying and improving our
> documentation for our EOL policy.
>
> > This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been involved with during the last 14 years.
>
> The new PIP process, with its increased purview, has increased the
> number of votes. I have appreciated the increased development
> discussion on the ML, but maybe the discussions (especially the ones
> that look like votes) and then the subsequent votes are leading to the
> high vote volume.
>
> We could update the PIP process so that DISCUSSIONS without any
> pushback during a certain time period do not need VOTES.
>
> Thanks,
> Michael
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 6:00 PM Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been involved with during the last 14 years.
> >
> > For most projects lazy consensus applies: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus
> >
> > We also tend to “vote” during discussions which does not really advance a conversation.
> >
> > If we want to have a VOTE then there are good reasons to start it NOW.
> >
> > All the Best,
> > Dave
> >
> > > On Jan 3, 2022, at 3:48 PM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Agree to have a vote to keep a record.
> > >
> > > - Sijie
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:40 PM 陳智弘 <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be better
> > >> to the community.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道：
> > >>
> > >>> I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS.
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hello,
> > >>>> We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
> > >>>>
> > >>>> We must declare 2.6 EOF.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the
> > >> Pulsar
> > >>>> project.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not cut
> > >>>> releases for a few important bugs.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thoughts?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Enrico
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Posted by Michael Marshall <mm...@apache.org>.
I agree with Dave. Lazy consensus gives us exactly what we need: to
know if someone would like branch-2.6 to stay alive. If no one
responds that they need it within the time period, then no one needs
it.
PIP 47 briefly mentions our EOL policy, but the policy doesn't cover
our current case where we released fewer than 4 minor versions in a
year. I think we'd benefit from clarifying and improving our
documentation for our EOL policy.
> This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been involved with during the last 14 years.
The new PIP process, with its increased purview, has increased the
number of votes. I have appreciated the increased development
discussion on the ML, but maybe the discussions (especially the ones
that look like votes) and then the subsequent votes are leading to the
high vote volume.
We could update the PIP process so that DISCUSSIONS without any
pushback during a certain time period do not need VOTES.
Thanks,
Michael
On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 6:00 PM Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been involved with during the last 14 years.
>
> For most projects lazy consensus applies: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus
>
> We also tend to “vote” during discussions which does not really advance a conversation.
>
> If we want to have a VOTE then there are good reasons to start it NOW.
>
> All the Best,
> Dave
>
> > On Jan 3, 2022, at 3:48 PM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Agree to have a vote to keep a record.
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:40 PM 陳智弘 <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be better
> >> to the community.
> >>
> >>
> >> Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道：
> >>
> >>> I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS.
> >>>
> >>>> On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>> We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
> >>>>
> >>>> We must declare 2.6 EOF.
> >>>>
> >>>> IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the
> >> Pulsar
> >>>> project.
> >>>>
> >>>> So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not cut
> >>>> releases for a few important bugs.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thoughts?
> >>>>
> >>>> Enrico
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been involved with during the last 14 years.
For most projects lazy consensus applies: https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus
We also tend to “vote” during discussions which does not really advance a conversation.
If we want to have a VOTE then there are good reasons to start it NOW.
All the Best,
Dave
> On Jan 3, 2022, at 3:48 PM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Agree to have a vote to keep a record.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:40 PM 陳智弘 <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be better
>> to the community.
>>
>>
>> Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道：
>>
>>> I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS.
>>>
>>>> On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>> We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
>>>>
>>>> We must declare 2.6 EOF.
>>>>
>>>> IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the
>> Pulsar
>>>> project.
>>>>
>>>> So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not cut
>>>> releases for a few important bugs.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Enrico
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Posted by Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com>.
Agree to have a vote to keep a record.
- Sijie
On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:40 PM 陳智弘 <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be better
> to the community.
>
>
> Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道：
>
> > I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS.
> >
> > > On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > > We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
> > >
> > > We must declare 2.6 EOF.
> > >
> > > IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the
> Pulsar
> > > project.
> > >
> > > So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not cut
> > > releases for a few important bugs.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Enrico
> >
> >
>
Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Posted by 陳智弘 <th...@gmail.com>.
I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be better
to the community.
Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道：
> I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS.
>
> > On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
> >
> > We must declare 2.6 EOF.
> >
> > IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the Pulsar
> > project.
> >
> > So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not cut
> > releases for a few important bugs.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Enrico
>
>
Re: Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS.
> On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
> We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6
>
> We must declare 2.6 EOF.
>
> IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the Pulsar
> project.
>
> So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not cut
> releases for a few important bugs.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Enrico