Re: [VOTE] Release Lucene 9.9.0 RC1

[Greg Miller <gs...@gmail.com>]

Thanks Adrien, that makes sense. I was wondering how we'd ensure all API
breakages in a major release were covered with deprecation messages. Sounds
like this is the answer.

Cheers,
-Greg

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 11:14 AM Adrien Grand <jp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> My expectation is that we will do a 9.x minor at about the same time as
> 10.0 anyway, this is what we have done in the past for new majors. This
> will give an opportunity to make sure we have deprecation warnings for all
> breaking changes in 10.0.
>
> Le jeu. 30 nov. 2023, 10:43, Chris Hegarty
> <ch...@elastic.co.invalid> a écrit :
>
>> For clarity, consider this vote cancelled. A new vote has been started on
>> an RC2 build.
>>
>> On 30 Nov 2023, at 16:22, Greg Miller <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If we're spinning a new RC, I'd like to ask this group if it would make
>> sense to pull this very small method deprecation in:
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12854
>>
>> If there's a chance we don't release a 9.10 and go directly to 10.0, this
>> would be our last opportunity to mark it deprecated on a 9.x version so we
>> can actually remove it in 10.0. It's really minor though, so I don't want
>> to create churn, but if we can get it into 9.9 without much issue, it would
>> be nice. If folks agree, I can get it merged onto 9.9.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for raising the issue. I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or
>> not to do the deprecation in this release, and since you say that it is
>> minor, then I don’t see that it necessitates another respin.
>>
>> Since I had already started an RC2 build, then I just continued with it
>> (and since the above issue is not yet reviewed ). If others feel like the
>> deprecation should absolutely be in, then we can do an RC3.
>>
>> -Chris.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Greg
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 7:58 AM Michael Sokolov <ms...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> for the sake of posterity, I did get a successful smoketest:
>>>
>>> SUCCESS! [1:00:06.512261]
>>>
>>> but +0 to release I guess since it's moot...
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:38 AM Michael McCandless <
>>> lucene@mikemccandless.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56 AM Chris Hegarty
>>>> <ch...@elastic.co.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time
>>>>> again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :)
>>>>
>>>> Mike McCandless
>>>>
>>>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com
>>>>
>>>
>>