You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@hbase.apache.org by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> on 2018/12/07 19:35:58 UTC
[DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1, 1.5.0,
in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making maintenance
releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I don't
see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No distinction
in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per our
compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention moves
away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code lines,
I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
longer necessary.
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org>.
yes please this would be great!
I have a DISCUSS thread I've been drafting about doing the same thing
for branch-2 releases. I think in general we need to get back in the
habit of only making maintenance releases when someone steps forward
with a specific need.
I plan to keep making branch-1.2 releases until April 2019.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 1:36 PM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1, 1.5.0,
> in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making maintenance
> releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
>
> I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I don't
> see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No distinction
> in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per our
> compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
>
> Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
>
> In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention moves
> away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
>
> If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code lines,
> I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> longer necessary.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1
directly
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
+1
On 12/7/18 2:35 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote:
> Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1, 1.5.0,
> in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making maintenance
> releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
>
> I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I don't
> see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No distinction
> in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per our
> compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
>
> Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
>
> In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention moves
> away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
>
> If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code lines,
> I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> longer necessary.
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Allan Yang <al...@apache.org>.
I think Andrew's way makes sense for branch-1, we can release 1.6,1.7 and
so on directly on branch-1. Since in branch-1, we will only have bug fixes.
If we want to apply this policy to branch-2, we'd be careful when new
functions check in, because all feature releases will include this function
if we only have a branch-2. But good news is that we only need to commit
our code to one branch, for now, sometimes I need to commit to four
branches(branch-2.0, branch-2.1, branch-2 and master). And for users, they
don't have to make difficult chose about which release line they need to
use. And they don't have to consider about compatibility when upgrading a
minor version. We make sure all the Incompatible changes are only commit to
master branch(for releasing 3.x).
Best Regards
Allan Yang
Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月9日周日 上午7:35写道：
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:59 PM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > We could do that. Or we could simply renumber branch-1 to 1.6.x at that
> > time, e.g. 1.5.whatever-SNAPSHOT -> 1.6.0-SNAPSHOT. Every release has a
> tag
> > in rel/. It is possible at any time to check out from a release tag and
> > make a branch for an additional patch release for an old minor line. If
> we
> > need to do it, we can at that time, otherwise why proliferate branches
> and
> > make more work for committers? I think for branch-1 after moving from
> > 1.5.whatever to 1.6.0 any additional 1.5.x releases would be unlikely,
> and
> > going forward for 1.6, and so on. This same policy could work for
> branch-2.
> > We shouldn't be afraid to make new minors. Prior to 1.0.0 every release
> was
> > a minor release and patch releases were rare. I think we want to get back
> > to something more like that.
> >
> > It also makes sense to have a long term stable branch. That is currently
> > branch-1.2. If in the future we want it to be 1.5, then at that time it
> > makes sense to have a separate branch-1.5 for the LTS.
> >
> >
> Let's try it.
>
> Should be easy to do on branch-1 what with a single 'owner'.
>
> branch-2 would prove a more interesting experiment. Let branch-2 be where
> we cut 2.2.0 and 2.2.1, etc., from? (We need an RM for 2.2....)
>
> S
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If 1.5 is not the last minor release line, then how do we release 1.6?
> > Make
> > > a branch-1.5 and then start to release 1.6 from branch-1?
> > >
> > > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午9:36写道：
> > >
> > > > Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change
> > is
> > > > going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the
> last
> > > > minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could
> treat
> > > > branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not
> > my
> > > > proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
> > > > branch-1.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can
> > > > release
> > > > > the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport
> any
> > > big
> > > > > new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the
> last
> > > > minor
> > > > > release line for 1.x?
> > > > >
> > > > > Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from
> > > branch-1,
> > > > > > 1.5.0,
> > > > > > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> > > > > maintenance
> > > > > > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be
> > > > necessary
> > > > > > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources
> > continue
> > > > to
> > > > > > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available
> > attention. I
> > > > > don't
> > > > > > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in
> > the
> > > > > > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> > > > > distinction
> > > > > > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least
> > > > initially.
> > > > > > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new
> minor
> > > per
> > > > > our
> > > > > > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release
> > from
> > > > > > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then.
> > We
> > > > have
> > > > > > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all
> > attention
> > > > > moves
> > > > > > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and
> > > > perhaps
> > > > > > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor
> > code
> > > > > > lines,
> > > > > > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree
> it
> > is
> > > > no
> > > > > > > longer necessary.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Agree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > S
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > > truth's
> > > > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> truth's
> > > > decrepit hands
> > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Allan Yang <al...@apache.org>.
I think Andrew's way makes sense for branch-1, we can release 1.6,1.7 and
so on directly on branch-1. Since in branch-1, we will only have bug fixes.
If we want to apply this policy to branch-2, we'd be careful when new
functions check in, because all feature releases will include this function
if we only have a branch-2. But good news is that we only need to commit
our code to one branch, for now, sometimes I need to commit to four
branches(branch-2.0, branch-2.1, branch-2 and master). And for users, they
don't have to make difficult chose about which release line they need to
use. And they don't have to consider about compatibility when upgrading a
minor version. We make sure all the Incompatible changes are only commit to
master branch(for releasing 3.x).
Best Regards
Allan Yang
Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月9日周日 上午7:35写道：
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:59 PM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > We could do that. Or we could simply renumber branch-1 to 1.6.x at that
> > time, e.g. 1.5.whatever-SNAPSHOT -> 1.6.0-SNAPSHOT. Every release has a
> tag
> > in rel/. It is possible at any time to check out from a release tag and
> > make a branch for an additional patch release for an old minor line. If
> we
> > need to do it, we can at that time, otherwise why proliferate branches
> and
> > make more work for committers? I think for branch-1 after moving from
> > 1.5.whatever to 1.6.0 any additional 1.5.x releases would be unlikely,
> and
> > going forward for 1.6, and so on. This same policy could work for
> branch-2.
> > We shouldn't be afraid to make new minors. Prior to 1.0.0 every release
> was
> > a minor release and patch releases were rare. I think we want to get back
> > to something more like that.
> >
> > It also makes sense to have a long term stable branch. That is currently
> > branch-1.2. If in the future we want it to be 1.5, then at that time it
> > makes sense to have a separate branch-1.5 for the LTS.
> >
> >
> Let's try it.
>
> Should be easy to do on branch-1 what with a single 'owner'.
>
> branch-2 would prove a more interesting experiment. Let branch-2 be where
> we cut 2.2.0 and 2.2.1, etc., from? (We need an RM for 2.2....)
>
> S
>
>
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If 1.5 is not the last minor release line, then how do we release 1.6?
> > Make
> > > a branch-1.5 and then start to release 1.6 from branch-1?
> > >
> > > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午9:36写道：
> > >
> > > > Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change
> > is
> > > > going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the
> last
> > > > minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could
> treat
> > > > branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not
> > my
> > > > proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
> > > > branch-1.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can
> > > > release
> > > > > the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport
> any
> > > big
> > > > > new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the
> last
> > > > minor
> > > > > release line for 1.x?
> > > > >
> > > > > Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <
> > apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from
> > > branch-1,
> > > > > > 1.5.0,
> > > > > > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> > > > > maintenance
> > > > > > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be
> > > > necessary
> > > > > > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources
> > continue
> > > > to
> > > > > > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available
> > attention. I
> > > > > don't
> > > > > > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in
> > the
> > > > > > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> > > > > distinction
> > > > > > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least
> > > > initially.
> > > > > > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new
> minor
> > > per
> > > > > our
> > > > > > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release
> > from
> > > > > > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then.
> > We
> > > > have
> > > > > > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all
> > attention
> > > > > moves
> > > > > > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and
> > > > perhaps
> > > > > > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor
> > code
> > > > > > lines,
> > > > > > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree
> it
> > is
> > > > no
> > > > > > > longer necessary.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Agree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > S
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > > truth's
> > > > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> truth's
> > > > decrepit hands
> > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:59 PM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> We could do that. Or we could simply renumber branch-1 to 1.6.x at that
> time, e.g. 1.5.whatever-SNAPSHOT -> 1.6.0-SNAPSHOT. Every release has a tag
> in rel/. It is possible at any time to check out from a release tag and
> make a branch for an additional patch release for an old minor line. If we
> need to do it, we can at that time, otherwise why proliferate branches and
> make more work for committers? I think for branch-1 after moving from
> 1.5.whatever to 1.6.0 any additional 1.5.x releases would be unlikely, and
> going forward for 1.6, and so on. This same policy could work for branch-2.
> We shouldn't be afraid to make new minors. Prior to 1.0.0 every release was
> a minor release and patch releases were rare. I think we want to get back
> to something more like that.
>
> It also makes sense to have a long term stable branch. That is currently
> branch-1.2. If in the future we want it to be 1.5, then at that time it
> makes sense to have a separate branch-1.5 for the LTS.
>
>
Let's try it.
Should be easy to do on branch-1 what with a single 'owner'.
branch-2 would prove a more interesting experiment. Let branch-2 be where
we cut 2.2.0 and 2.2.1, etc., from? (We need an RM for 2.2....)
S
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > If 1.5 is not the last minor release line, then how do we release 1.6?
> Make
> > a branch-1.5 and then start to release 1.6 from branch-1?
> >
> > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午9:36写道：
> >
> > > Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change
> is
> > > going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the last
> > > minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could treat
> > > branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not
> my
> > > proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
> > > branch-1.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can
> > > release
> > > > the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
> > > >
> > > > I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any
> > big
> > > > new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last
> > > minor
> > > > release line for 1.x?
> > > >
> > > > Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from
> > branch-1,
> > > > > 1.5.0,
> > > > > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> > > > maintenance
> > > > > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be
> > > necessary
> > > > > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources
> continue
> > > to
> > > > > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available
> attention. I
> > > > don't
> > > > > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in
> the
> > > > > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> > > > distinction
> > > > > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least
> > > initially.
> > > > > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor
> > per
> > > > our
> > > > > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release
> from
> > > > > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then.
> We
> > > have
> > > > > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all
> attention
> > > > moves
> > > > > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and
> > > perhaps
> > > > > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor
> code
> > > > > lines,
> > > > > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it
> is
> > > no
> > > > > > longer necessary.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Agree.
> > > > >
> > > > > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> > > > >
> > > > > S
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > truth's
> > > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > > decrepit hands
> > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:59 PM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> We could do that. Or we could simply renumber branch-1 to 1.6.x at that
> time, e.g. 1.5.whatever-SNAPSHOT -> 1.6.0-SNAPSHOT. Every release has a tag
> in rel/. It is possible at any time to check out from a release tag and
> make a branch for an additional patch release for an old minor line. If we
> need to do it, we can at that time, otherwise why proliferate branches and
> make more work for committers? I think for branch-1 after moving from
> 1.5.whatever to 1.6.0 any additional 1.5.x releases would be unlikely, and
> going forward for 1.6, and so on. This same policy could work for branch-2.
> We shouldn't be afraid to make new minors. Prior to 1.0.0 every release was
> a minor release and patch releases were rare. I think we want to get back
> to something more like that.
>
> It also makes sense to have a long term stable branch. That is currently
> branch-1.2. If in the future we want it to be 1.5, then at that time it
> makes sense to have a separate branch-1.5 for the LTS.
>
>
Let's try it.
Should be easy to do on branch-1 what with a single 'owner'.
branch-2 would prove a more interesting experiment. Let branch-2 be where
we cut 2.2.0 and 2.2.1, etc., from? (We need an RM for 2.2....)
S
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > If 1.5 is not the last minor release line, then how do we release 1.6?
> Make
> > a branch-1.5 and then start to release 1.6 from branch-1?
> >
> > Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午9:36写道：
> >
> > > Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change
> is
> > > going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the last
> > > minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could treat
> > > branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not
> my
> > > proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
> > > branch-1.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can
> > > release
> > > > the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
> > > >
> > > > I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any
> > big
> > > > new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last
> > > minor
> > > > release line for 1.x?
> > > >
> > > > Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from
> > branch-1,
> > > > > 1.5.0,
> > > > > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> > > > maintenance
> > > > > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be
> > > necessary
> > > > > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources
> continue
> > > to
> > > > > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available
> attention. I
> > > > don't
> > > > > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in
> the
> > > > > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> > > > distinction
> > > > > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least
> > > initially.
> > > > > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor
> > per
> > > > our
> > > > > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release
> from
> > > > > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then.
> We
> > > have
> > > > > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all
> attention
> > > > moves
> > > > > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and
> > > perhaps
> > > > > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor
> code
> > > > > lines,
> > > > > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it
> is
> > > no
> > > > > > longer necessary.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Agree.
> > > > >
> > > > > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> > > > >
> > > > > S
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > > truth's
> > > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > > decrepit hands
> > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
We could do that. Or we could simply renumber branch-1 to 1.6.x at that
time, e.g. 1.5.whatever-SNAPSHOT -> 1.6.0-SNAPSHOT. Every release has a tag
in rel/. It is possible at any time to check out from a release tag and
make a branch for an additional patch release for an old minor line. If we
need to do it, we can at that time, otherwise why proliferate branches and
make more work for committers? I think for branch-1 after moving from
1.5.whatever to 1.6.0 any additional 1.5.x releases would be unlikely, and
going forward for 1.6, and so on. This same policy could work for branch-2.
We shouldn't be afraid to make new minors. Prior to 1.0.0 every release was
a minor release and patch releases were rare. I think we want to get back
to something more like that.
It also makes sense to have a long term stable branch. That is currently
branch-1.2. If in the future we want it to be 1.5, then at that time it
makes sense to have a separate branch-1.5 for the LTS.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If 1.5 is not the last minor release line, then how do we release 1.6? Make
> a branch-1.5 and then start to release 1.6 from branch-1?
>
> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午9:36写道：
>
> > Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change is
> > going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the last
> > minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could treat
> > branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not my
> > proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
> > branch-1.
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can
> > release
> > > the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
> > >
> > > I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any
> big
> > > new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last
> > minor
> > > release line for 1.x?
> > >
> > > Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from
> branch-1,
> > > > 1.5.0,
> > > > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> > > maintenance
> > > > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be
> > necessary
> > > > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > > > >
> > > > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue
> > to
> > > > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I
> > > don't
> > > > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> > > > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> > > distinction
> > > > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least
> > initially.
> > > > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor
> per
> > > our
> > > > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> > > > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We
> > have
> > > > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > > > >
> > > > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > > > >
> > > > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention
> > > moves
> > > > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and
> > perhaps
> > > > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > > > >
> > > > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code
> > > > lines,
> > > > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is
> > no
> > > > > longer necessary.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Agree.
> > > >
> > > > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> > > >
> > > > S
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > truth's
> > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
We could do that. Or we could simply renumber branch-1 to 1.6.x at that
time, e.g. 1.5.whatever-SNAPSHOT -> 1.6.0-SNAPSHOT. Every release has a tag
in rel/. It is possible at any time to check out from a release tag and
make a branch for an additional patch release for an old minor line. If we
need to do it, we can at that time, otherwise why proliferate branches and
make more work for committers? I think for branch-1 after moving from
1.5.whatever to 1.6.0 any additional 1.5.x releases would be unlikely, and
going forward for 1.6, and so on. This same policy could work for branch-2.
We shouldn't be afraid to make new minors. Prior to 1.0.0 every release was
a minor release and patch releases were rare. I think we want to get back
to something more like that.
It also makes sense to have a long term stable branch. That is currently
branch-1.2. If in the future we want it to be 1.5, then at that time it
makes sense to have a separate branch-1.5 for the LTS.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:54 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If 1.5 is not the last minor release line, then how do we release 1.6? Make
> a branch-1.5 and then start to release 1.6 from branch-1?
>
> Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午9:36写道：
>
> > Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change is
> > going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the last
> > minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could treat
> > branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not my
> > proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
> > branch-1.
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can
> > release
> > > the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
> > >
> > > I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any
> big
> > > new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last
> > minor
> > > release line for 1.x?
> > >
> > > Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from
> branch-1,
> > > > 1.5.0,
> > > > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> > > maintenance
> > > > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be
> > necessary
> > > > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > > > >
> > > > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue
> > to
> > > > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I
> > > don't
> > > > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> > > > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> > > distinction
> > > > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least
> > initially.
> > > > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor
> per
> > > our
> > > > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> > > > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We
> > have
> > > > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > > > >
> > > > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > > > >
> > > > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention
> > > moves
> > > > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and
> > perhaps
> > > > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > > > >
> > > > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code
> > > > lines,
> > > > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is
> > no
> > > > > longer necessary.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Agree.
> > > >
> > > > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> > > >
> > > > S
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> > truth's
> > > > > decrepit hands
> > > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by "张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.
If 1.5 is not the last minor release line, then how do we release 1.6? Make
a branch-1.5 and then start to release 1.6 from branch-1?
Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午9:36写道：
> Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change is
> going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the last
> minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could treat
> branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not my
> proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
> branch-1.
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can
> release
> > the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
> >
> > I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any big
> > new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last
> minor
> > release line for 1.x?
> >
> > Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> >
> > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1,
> > > 1.5.0,
> > > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> > maintenance
> > > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be
> necessary
> > > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > > >
> > > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue
> to
> > > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I
> > don't
> > > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> > > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> > distinction
> > > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least
> initially.
> > > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per
> > our
> > > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> > > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We
> have
> > > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > > >
> > > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > > >
> > > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention
> > moves
> > > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and
> perhaps
> > > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > > >
> > > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code
> > > lines,
> > > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is
> no
> > > > longer necessary.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Agree.
> > >
> > > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> > >
> > > S
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> truth's
> > > > decrepit hands
> > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by "张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.
If 1.5 is not the last minor release line, then how do we release 1.6? Make
a branch-1.5 and then start to release 1.6 from branch-1?
Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午9:36写道：
> Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change is
> going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the last
> minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could treat
> branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not my
> proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
> branch-1.
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can
> release
> > the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
> >
> > I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any big
> > new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last
> minor
> > release line for 1.x?
> >
> > Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> >
> > > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1,
> > > 1.5.0,
> > > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> > maintenance
> > > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be
> necessary
> > > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > > >
> > > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue
> to
> > > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I
> > don't
> > > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> > > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> > distinction
> > > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least
> initially.
> > > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per
> > our
> > > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> > > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We
> have
> > > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > > >
> > > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > > >
> > > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention
> > moves
> > > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and
> perhaps
> > > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > > >
> > > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code
> > > lines,
> > > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is
> no
> > > > longer necessary.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Agree.
> > >
> > > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> > >
> > > S
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > --
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from
> truth's
> > > > decrepit hands
> > > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change is
going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the last
minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could treat
branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not my
proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
branch-1.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can release
> the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
>
> I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any big
> new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last minor
> release line for 1.x?
>
> Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
>
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1,
> > 1.5.0,
> > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> maintenance
> > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > >
> > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I
> don't
> > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> distinction
> > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per
> our
> > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > >
> > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > >
> > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention
> moves
> > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > >
> > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code
> > lines,
> > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> > > longer necessary.
> > >
> > >
> > > Agree.
> >
> > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> >
> > S
> >
> >
> >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > > decrepit hands
> > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
Yeah, for branch-1 it is no longer a development branch. Every change is
going to be maintenance related. No, I don't expect 1.5 to be the last
minor release line for 1.x. Maybe? Maybe not. In theory we could treat
branch-2 the same. Master is the only development branch. That is not my
proposal, though. I'm only concerned with RM activities related to
branch-1.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 5:33 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can release
> the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
>
> I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any big
> new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last minor
> release line for 1.x?
>
> Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
>
> > On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1,
> > 1.5.0,
> > > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making
> maintenance
> > > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> > > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> > >
> > > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> > > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I
> don't
> > > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> > > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No
> distinction
> > > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> > > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per
> our
> > > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> > > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> > > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> > >
> > > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> > >
> > > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention
> moves
> > > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> > > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> > >
> > > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code
> > lines,
> > > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> > > longer necessary.
> > >
> > >
> > > Agree.
> >
> > I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
> >
> > S
> >
> >
> >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > > decrepit hands
> > > - A23, Crosstalk
> > >
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Andrew
Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
decrepit hands
- A23, Crosstalk
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by "张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.
So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can release
the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any big
new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last minor
release line for 1.x?
Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1,
> 1.5.0,
> > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making maintenance
> > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> >
> > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I don't
> > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No distinction
> > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per our
> > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> >
> > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> >
> > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention moves
> > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> >
> > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code
> lines,
> > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> > longer necessary.
> >
> >
> > Agree.
>
> I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
>
> S
>
>
>
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by "张铎 (Duo Zhang)" <pa...@gmail.com>.
So the idea is that, if we have a newer major release line, we can release
the previous major releases directly from the 'developing' branch?
I think for branch-1 it is fine, as we are not likely to backport any big
new feature to 1.x any more. And does this mean that 1.5 is the last minor
release line for 1.x?
Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2018年12月8日周六 上午4:15写道：
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1,
> 1.5.0,
> > in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making maintenance
> > releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> > after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
> >
> > I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> > shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I don't
> > see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> > beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No distinction
> > in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> > Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per our
> > compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> > branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> > expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
> >
> > Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
> >
> > In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention moves
> > away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> > branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
> >
> > If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code
> lines,
> > I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> > longer necessary.
> >
> >
> > Agree.
>
> I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
>
> S
>
>
>
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew
> >
> > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> > decrepit hands
> > - A23, Crosstalk
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1, 1.5.0,
> in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making maintenance
> releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
>
> I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I don't
> see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No distinction
> in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per our
> compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
>
> Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
>
> In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention moves
> away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
>
> If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code lines,
> I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> longer necessary.
>
>
> Agree.
I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
S
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Sean Busbey <bu...@apache.org>.
yes please this would be great!
I have a DISCUSS thread I've been drafting about doing the same thing
for branch-2 releases. I think in general we need to get back in the
habit of only making maintenance releases when someone steps forward
with a specific need.
I plan to keep making branch-1.2 releases until April 2019.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 1:36 PM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1, 1.5.0,
> in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making maintenance
> releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
>
> I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I don't
> see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No distinction
> in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per our
> compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
>
> Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
>
> In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention moves
> away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
>
> If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code lines,
> I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> longer necessary.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
Re: [DISCUSS] No more release branches for 1.x, release from branch-1 directly
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 11:36 AM Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Please be advised I plan to RM the next minor release from branch-1, 1.5.0,
> in January of 2019. Once this is done we can continue making maintenance
> releases from branch-1.4 as needed but expect that not to be necessary
> after a couple of months (or perhaps even immediately).
>
> I see no need to make a branch-1.5. As community resources continue to
> shift away from branch-1 we need to conserve available attention. I don't
> see why we cannot release directly from branch-1. Certainly in the
> beginning any branch-1.5 would be lock step with branch-1. No distinction
> in branch curation means no need for a new branch, at least initially.
> Also, should a commit land in branch-1 that requires a new minor per our
> compatibility guidelines then I don't see why the next release from
> branch-1 cannot a new minor (1.6.0, etc.) right there and then. We have
> expressed intent to make more frequent minor releases anyhow.
>
> Related, I started a DISCUSS thread about EOL of branch-1.3.
>
> In my opinion the optimal future for branch-1, until all attention moves
> away from it, is continuing releases directly from branch-1 and perhaps
> branch-1.2 (depends on Busbey's plans for it).
>
> If you would prefer we continue to make new branches for minor code lines,
> I can do that for 1.5, no problem, but perhaps you will agree it is no
> longer necessary.
>
>
> Agree.
I also like the idea of doing same thing for branch-2.
S
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrew
>
> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's
> decrepit hands
> - A23, Crosstalk
>