Re: Release 7.0 process starts

[David Smiley <da...@gmail.com>]

Anshum (the RM):
I believe the release process includes instructions on transitioning Jira
"resolved" status to "closed".  I see Lucene 7.0 issues not yet marked
closed; maybe others.  This sort of thing happens often, I think... I
wonder if we have any value in even having a distinction if it gets
forgotten and not often noticed.

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 5:36 PM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com> wrote:

> Now with docs in git this should be within reach with some discipline!
> If we don’t manage to get the official refGuide released simultaneously
> it’d be just one hour of work to convert the "Major Changes in Solr X”
> refguide page into a blog post that could be published on the CMS?
>
> PS: I just updated the “About versions” section of
> http://lucene.apache.org/solr/community.html
> This should probably be part of the RM instructions?
>
> Another observation is that the release announcement mail
> should be formatted with a max line length of 75 or something,
> to format nicely in ASCII format.
>
> Congrats on the release, everyone!
>
> --
> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect
> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com
>
> 20. sep. 2017 kl. 21.29 skrev Cassandra Targett <ca...@gmail.com>:
>
> Hijacking this thread a little bit now that Anshum has what he needs
> to release...I wanted to clarify my earlier point about the Ref Guide
> being in sync with the release notes.
>
> I'd like to see us evolve from our current model of Release Notes ->
> CHANGES.txt and provide an intermediary level of information geared to
> those upgrading. What I wish we could have done is add a link in the
> release notes to the upgrade notes in the Ref Guide instead of
> directing people to CHANGES.
>
> In order to do this, though, the Ref Guide needs to be released at
> just about the same time. Docs shouldn't be something that starts when
> someone proposes a release, but instead is considered a critical part
> of the actual release. I think most of us nod our heads at that idea,
> but when a vote thread starts, we should be looking for typos instead
> of still chasing down information that could have been written/updated
> when the code change was made.
>
> People still need CHANGES.txt for their detailed upgrade planning. But
> we can do more to help them make initial plans for their upgrades
> without overwhelming them with detail. And, of course, with a major
> release like 7.0, it would be nice if they had documentation to go
> with it instead of waiting another X weeks.
>
> Enough of my soapbox - I hope by the time 8.0 is ready to go out we
> are able to publish the Ref Guide with the release. I thought now
> might be a good time to plug for it.
>
> Cassandra
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Anshum Gupta <an...@apple.com> wrote:
>
> I’ve added a note about the analytics component, and restructured the
> points.
>
> Thanks to everyone and please don’t make any more changes as I’m adding
> these to the news section and committing now.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 10:30 AM, Anshum Gupta <an...@apple.com> wrote:
>
> +1 on keeping that section. I just read it wrong I guess, and assumed you
> wanted to remove that section.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Joel Bernstein <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think we should keep all the typical wording around upgrades. I'm just
> suggesting an arrangement of the highlights section.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Anshum Gupta <an...@apple.com> wrote:
>
>
> Joel, I was actually asking if you meant removing the following section:
>
> Being a major release, Solr 7 removes many deprecated APIs, changes
> various parameter defaults and
> behavior. Some changes may require a re-index of your content. You are
> thus encouraged to thoroughly
> read the "Upgrade Notes" at
> http://lucene.apache.org/solr/7_0_0/changes/Changes.html or in the
> CHANGES.txt file accompanying the release.
>
>
> Uwe: I am ready with all my (website) changes, and just waiting on the
> Solr ‘news’ section that is a subset of the release notes. From the looks
> of
> it, we are done with the changes, and I can copy the relevant sections and
> commit the website changes. So yes, the release would happen on the 20th :)
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Joel Bernstein <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think the release highlights are about what's exciting in the release.
> So leading with the most exciting features is the way to go. Informing
> people of changes that will affect them can be done in the upgrade notes in
> CHANGES.txt.
>
> What do other people think about this?
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Anshum Gupta <an...@apple.com> wrote:
>
>
> Also, I think it might make sense to add a line saying that the Ref Guide
> for 7.0 would be released soon.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:20 AM, Anshum Gupta <an...@apple.com> wrote:
>
> Sounds good.
>
> Also, I am not a java expert like Uwe, and a few others here so let me
> know if we should leave in the ‘Jigsaw’ part.
>
> David, you added that yesterday and Mike looked at the Lucene release
> notes and let it stay there. So I was wondering if it’s
> important/reasonable
> enough to highlight in the release notes.
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 8:12 AM, Joel Bernstein <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I would also consider changing the order of the list to highlight the
> most interesting features.
>
> If I saw this as the top highlight I would think of this is mainly a
> maintenance release.
>
>
> Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
>  pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML
> format.
>
>
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Joel Bernstein <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> I just made the edit.
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Joel Bernstein <jo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> For streaming expressions let's go with:
>
> Solr 7 Streaming Expressions adds a new statistical programming syntax
> for
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
> and
> graph result sets.
>
>
> Joel Bernstein
> http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/
> LONDON) <cp...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
>
> Cool. How about 7th and 8th bullet points like this. 8th bullet ending
> in Java 9 future magic still, not that the magic counts but fitting things
> on roughly a screen full for folks to easily get the gist of the new
> release
> is important I think.
>
> -Christine
>
> * Solr 7 adds Streaming Expressions, a new statistical programming
> syntax for
> the statistical analysis of sql queries, random samples, time series
> and
> graph result sets.
>
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:54:54
> To: Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON ) , dev@lucene.apache.org
>
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
> This looks good, other than the wt=xml correction in #1, as Varun
> pointed out. Also, I really think we should highlight streaming expressions
> (Math Engine) even if that means we don’t hit the ‘7 points’ mark :).
>
> -Anshum
>
>
>
> On Sep 20, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Christine Poerschke (BLOOMBERG/ LONDON)
> <cp...@bloomberg.net> wrote:
>
> Totally agree with choosing _7_ highlights for the Solr _7_ release!
>
> Below is the revised draft I came up with:
>
> (Notice that v2 is the 2nd bullet, though I think it yet needs to
> mention one or _two_ benefits of using the new API especially since we
> mention that /solr/ continues to work.)
>
> (Also notice some re-ordering of the bullets starting with the
> used-by-many JSON first, then v2 API second, then third collection creation
> which mentions faceting and so leads over to the fourth bullet re: facet
> refinement. Fifth is the new replica types (that bullet being slightly
> longer than the others to explain what the types are about). Sixth is
> auto-scaling which mentions future releases (would folks use new replica
> types first before moving on to auto-scaling?). Seventh and last then is
> Solr _7_ mention with Java _9_ i.e. the just-arrived future again there.)
>
> Solr 7.0 Release Highlights:
>
> * Indented JSON is now the default response format for all APIs,
> pass wt=json and/or indent=off to use the previous unindented XML
> format.
>
> * The new v2 API, exposed at /api/ and also supported via SolrJ, is
> now the
> preferred API, but /solr/ continues to work.
>
> * A new `_default` configset is used if no config is specified at
> collection
> creation. The data-driven functionality of this configset indexes
> strings as
> analyzed text while at the same time copying to a `*_str` field
> suitable for
> faceting.
>
> * The JSON Facet API now supports two-phase facet refinement to ensure
> accurate
> counts and statistics for facet buckets returned in distributed mode.
>
> * Replica Types - Solr 7 supports different replica types, which
> handle updates
> differently. In addition to pure NRT operation where all replicas
> build an
> index and keep a replication log, you can now also add so called PULL
> replicas, achieving the read-speed optimized benefits of a
> master/slave
> setup while at the same time keeping index redundancy.
>
> * Auto-scaling. Solr can now allocate new replicas to nodes using a
> new auto
> scaling policy framework. This framework will in future releases
> enable Solr
> to move shards around based on load, disk etc.
>
> * Solr 7 is tested with and verified to support Java 9.
>
> From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 09/20/17 15:02:38
> To: dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Release 7.0 process starts
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:16 AM Jan Høydahl <ja...@cominvent.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> And please, I was serious about choosing 7 major features and not
> adding random single improvements. The list has already creeped from 7 to 9
> bullets. If you want to add something, then ask youself which of the other
> bullets that are less important to MOST USERS and then replace that bullet
> instead of adding more. Agree?
>
>
>
> I agree with that very much!  Each bullet added de-values the list as
> a whole.  IMO the Java 9 bullet can be removed (too few are even using it
> yet) and we get to 8 bullets; and those 8 are pretty good.
> --
> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org
>
>
> --
Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker
LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book:
http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com