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 2022/01/10 08:35:07 UTC
[LAZY CONSENSUS] Sending 2.6 release line to EOF
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: [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/>