You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@daffodil.apache.org by Steve Lawrence <sl...@apache.org> on 2019/12/20 12:30:43 UTC
[DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
I think we're overdue for another release, and we have a lot of nice
features and bug fixes that people should start using. This includes
UDFs, BLOBs, unordered sequences, improved type safety, initial compiler
speed up changes, 2GB+ file support, and much more. And all non
work-in-progress pull requests have been merged.
The only outstanding issue I'm aware of is a potential performance
degradation in 2.5.0, but after some discussions it sounds like that is
likely related to the spectre/meltdown patches, and not recent code
changes. And we likely won't know for sure until after the new year.
So I suggest that we start the process to release 2.5.0 from the current
state of Daffodil, hopefully with the dev@daffodil.a.o and
general@incubator.a.o voting finishing and releasing sometime in early
January. If it turns out there is a legitimate performance degradation,
we can fix that and issue a point release.
Any thoughts/objections? If not, I'll volunteer to be the release
manager and start the process on Monday.
- Steve
Re: [DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
Posted by "Sloane, Brandon" <bs...@tresys.com>.
+1
________________________________
From: Steve Lawrence <sl...@apache.org>
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2019 9:42 AM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org <de...@daffodil.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
Yeah, I'm assuming there's going to be some wrinkles with the new
container release process, and since I'm most familiar with that I think
it makes sense for me to do the release.
If there are issues, I can iron them out for the next release and it
should be a piece of cake for who ever does it next, which I agree
shouldn't be me.
On 12/20/19 9:36 AM, Beckerle, Mike wrote:
> +1
>
> My only concern is having Steve Lawrence be release manager again.
>
> Not that I want to do it, I truly don't want the distraction. it's just that it ought to be a rotating responsibility.
>
> If however, you want to run the whole process with the new docker-enabled build and release system, I will table my concern. The release after this should definitely be someone else.
>
> -mikeb
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Steve Lawrence <sl...@apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2019 7:30 AM
> To: dev@daffodil.apache.org <de...@daffodil.apache.org>
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
>
> I think we're overdue for another release, and we have a lot of nice
> features and bug fixes that people should start using. This includes
> UDFs, BLOBs, unordered sequences, improved type safety, initial compiler
> speed up changes, 2GB+ file support, and much more. And all non
> work-in-progress pull requests have been merged.
>
> The only outstanding issue I'm aware of is a potential performance
> degradation in 2.5.0, but after some discussions it sounds like that is
> likely related to the spectre/meltdown patches, and not recent code
> changes. And we likely won't know for sure until after the new year.
>
> So I suggest that we start the process to release 2.5.0 from the current
> state of Daffodil, hopefully with the dev@daffodil.a.o and
> general@incubator.a.o voting finishing and releasing sometime in early
> January. If it turns out there is a legitimate performance degradation,
> we can fix that and issue a point release.
>
> Any thoughts/objections? If not, I'll volunteer to be the release
> manager and start the process on Monday.
>
> - Steve
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
Posted by Steve Lawrence <sl...@apache.org>.
Yeah, I'm assuming there's going to be some wrinkles with the new
container release process, and since I'm most familiar with that I think
it makes sense for me to do the release.
If there are issues, I can iron them out for the next release and it
should be a piece of cake for who ever does it next, which I agree
shouldn't be me.
On 12/20/19 9:36 AM, Beckerle, Mike wrote:
> +1
>
> My only concern is having Steve Lawrence be release manager again.
>
> Not that I want to do it, I truly don't want the distraction. it's just that it ought to be a rotating responsibility.
>
> If however, you want to run the whole process with the new docker-enabled build and release system, I will table my concern. The release after this should definitely be someone else.
>
> -mikeb
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Steve Lawrence <sl...@apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2019 7:30 AM
> To: dev@daffodil.apache.org <de...@daffodil.apache.org>
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
>
> I think we're overdue for another release, and we have a lot of nice
> features and bug fixes that people should start using. This includes
> UDFs, BLOBs, unordered sequences, improved type safety, initial compiler
> speed up changes, 2GB+ file support, and much more. And all non
> work-in-progress pull requests have been merged.
>
> The only outstanding issue I'm aware of is a potential performance
> degradation in 2.5.0, but after some discussions it sounds like that is
> likely related to the spectre/meltdown patches, and not recent code
> changes. And we likely won't know for sure until after the new year.
>
> So I suggest that we start the process to release 2.5.0 from the current
> state of Daffodil, hopefully with the dev@daffodil.a.o and
> general@incubator.a.o voting finishing and releasing sometime in early
> January. If it turns out there is a legitimate performance degradation,
> we can fix that and issue a point release.
>
> Any thoughts/objections? If not, I'll volunteer to be the release
> manager and start the process on Monday.
>
> - Steve
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
Posted by "Beckerle, Mike" <mb...@tresys.com>.
+1
My only concern is having Steve Lawrence be release manager again.
Not that I want to do it, I truly don't want the distraction. it's just that it ought to be a rotating responsibility.
If however, you want to run the whole process with the new docker-enabled build and release system, I will table my concern. The release after this should definitely be someone else.
-mikeb
________________________________
From: Steve Lawrence <sl...@apache.org>
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2019 7:30 AM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org <de...@daffodil.apache.org>
Subject: [DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
I think we're overdue for another release, and we have a lot of nice
features and bug fixes that people should start using. This includes
UDFs, BLOBs, unordered sequences, improved type safety, initial compiler
speed up changes, 2GB+ file support, and much more. And all non
work-in-progress pull requests have been merged.
The only outstanding issue I'm aware of is a potential performance
degradation in 2.5.0, but after some discussions it sounds like that is
likely related to the spectre/meltdown patches, and not recent code
changes. And we likely won't know for sure until after the new year.
So I suggest that we start the process to release 2.5.0 from the current
state of Daffodil, hopefully with the dev@daffodil.a.o and
general@incubator.a.o voting finishing and releasing sometime in early
January. If it turns out there is a legitimate performance degradation,
we can fix that and issue a point release.
Any thoughts/objections? If not, I'll volunteer to be the release
manager and start the process on Monday.
- Steve
Re: [DISCUSS] Daffodil 2.5.0 Release
Posted by "Adams, Joshua" <ja...@tresys.com>.
+1
I'd be happy to take a crack at doing a release next time.
Josh
On Dec 20, 2019 7:39 AM, Steve Lawrence <sl...@apache.org> wrote:
I think we're overdue for another release, and we have a lot of nice
features and bug fixes that people should start using. This includes
UDFs, BLOBs, unordered sequences, improved type safety, initial compiler
speed up changes, 2GB+ file support, and much more. And all non
work-in-progress pull requests have been merged.
The only outstanding issue I'm aware of is a potential performance
degradation in 2.5.0, but after some discussions it sounds like that is
likely related to the spectre/meltdown patches, and not recent code
changes. And we likely won't know for sure until after the new year.
So I suggest that we start the process to release 2.5.0 from the current
state of Daffodil, hopefully with the dev@daffodil.a.o and
general@incubator.a.o voting finishing and releasing sometime in early
January. If it turns out there is a legitimate performance degradation,
we can fix that and issue a point release.
Any thoughts/objections? If not, I'll volunteer to be the release
manager and start the process on Monday.
- Steve