You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tinkerpop.apache.org by Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com> on 2017/08/09 10:51:48 UTC
[DISCUSS] 3.1.x EOL
We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a new level
in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're about to
go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is about to
release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any kind on
the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev on 3.0.x).
I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I thought I'd
start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last release
on that line of code?
Re: [DISCUSS] 3.1.x EOL
Posted by David Brown <da...@gmail.com>.
I'm
On Aug 9, 2017 6:51 AM, "Stephen Mallette" <sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a new level
> in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're about to
> go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is about to
> release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any kind on
> the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev on 3.0.x).
>
> I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I thought I'd
> start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last release
> on that line of code?
>
Re: [DISCUSS] 3.1.x EOL
Posted by Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>.
It's been a week now and there haven't been any concerns about EOL for
3.1.x on either this list or more recently the gremlin users list. I'm
happy to call that consensus. :) we'll make 3.1.8 the last release on that
line.
We'll just have tp32 and master to maintain going forward - i don't think
we need to branch a tp33 at this point as I don't think anyone is
considering 3.4.x at this point.
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Expanded this discussion to the user list: https://groups.google.
> com/d/msg/gremlin-users/zQHHOC5uoYw/tSaxOlMFCgAJ
>
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jason Plurad <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 on closing out with 3.1.8
>>
>> Most providers have already moved to 3.2.x. Any providers still on 3.1.x
>> should chime in on this thread (BlazeGraph
>> <https://github.com/blazegraph/tinkerpop3/blob/master/pom.xml#L69>,
>> ChronoGraph
>> <https://github.com/MartinHaeusler/chronos/blob/master/
>> build.gradle#L75-L76>)
>> if they need it to keep going.
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:19 AM, David Brown <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Aug 9, 2017 8:23 AM, "Ted Wilmes" <tw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > That makes good sense to me. I'd be honored to lead it off into the
>> > sunset.
>> > >
>> > > --Ted
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <
>> > jorgebaygondra@gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > 3.1 line is about 2 years old, I think its a lot of time for a
>> > relatively
>> > > > new project like TinkerPop.
>> > > > I'm in favor of making 3.1.8 the last release of the 3.1 branch.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Stephen Mallette <
>> > spmallette@gmail.com>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a
>> new
>> > > level
>> > > > > in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're
>> > about
>> > > to
>> > > > > go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is
>> > about
>> > > > to
>> > > > > release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any
>> kind
>> > > on
>> > > > > the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev
>> on
>> > > > 3.0.x).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I
>> thought
>> > > I'd
>> > > > > start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last
>> > > release
>> > > > > on that line of code?
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] 3.1.x EOL
Posted by Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>.
Expanded this discussion to the user list:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/gremlin-users/zQHHOC5uoYw/tSaxOlMFCgAJ
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Jason Plurad <pl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 on closing out with 3.1.8
>
> Most providers have already moved to 3.2.x. Any providers still on 3.1.x
> should chime in on this thread (BlazeGraph
> <https://github.com/blazegraph/tinkerpop3/blob/master/pom.xml#L69>,
> ChronoGraph
> <https://github.com/MartinHaeusler/chronos/blob/
> master/build.gradle#L75-L76>)
> if they need it to keep going.
>
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:19 AM, David Brown <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 9, 2017 8:23 AM, "Ted Wilmes" <tw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > That makes good sense to me. I'd be honored to lead it off into the
> > sunset.
> > >
> > > --Ted
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <
> > jorgebaygondra@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 3.1 line is about 2 years old, I think its a lot of time for a
> > relatively
> > > > new project like TinkerPop.
> > > > I'm in favor of making 3.1.8 the last release of the 3.1 branch.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Stephen Mallette <
> > spmallette@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a new
> > > level
> > > > > in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're
> > about
> > > to
> > > > > go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is
> > about
> > > > to
> > > > > release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any
> kind
> > > on
> > > > > the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev on
> > > > 3.0.x).
> > > > >
> > > > > I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I
> thought
> > > I'd
> > > > > start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last
> > > release
> > > > > on that line of code?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] 3.1.x EOL
Posted by Jason Plurad <pl...@gmail.com>.
+1 on closing out with 3.1.8
Most providers have already moved to 3.2.x. Any providers still on 3.1.x
should chime in on this thread (BlazeGraph
<https://github.com/blazegraph/tinkerpop3/blob/master/pom.xml#L69>,
ChronoGraph
<https://github.com/MartinHaeusler/chronos/blob/master/build.gradle#L75-L76>)
if they need it to keep going.
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 10:19 AM, David Brown <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 9, 2017 8:23 AM, "Ted Wilmes" <tw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That makes good sense to me. I'd be honored to lead it off into the
> sunset.
> >
> > --Ted
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <
> jorgebaygondra@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 3.1 line is about 2 years old, I think its a lot of time for a
> relatively
> > > new project like TinkerPop.
> > > I'm in favor of making 3.1.8 the last release of the 3.1 branch.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Stephen Mallette <
> spmallette@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a new
> > level
> > > > in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're
> about
> > to
> > > > go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is
> about
> > > to
> > > > release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any kind
> > on
> > > > the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev on
> > > 3.0.x).
> > > >
> > > > I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I thought
> > I'd
> > > > start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last
> > release
> > > > on that line of code?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] 3.1.x EOL
Posted by David Brown <da...@gmail.com>.
On Aug 9, 2017 8:23 AM, "Ted Wilmes" <tw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That makes good sense to me. I'd be honored to lead it off into the sunset.
>
> --Ted
>
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <jorgebaygondra@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > 3.1 line is about 2 years old, I think its a lot of time for a relatively
> > new project like TinkerPop.
> > I'm in favor of making 3.1.8 the last release of the 3.1 branch.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a new
> level
> > > in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're about
> to
> > > go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is about
> > to
> > > release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any kind
> on
> > > the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev on
> > 3.0.x).
> > >
> > > I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I thought
> I'd
> > > start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last
> release
> > > on that line of code?
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] 3.1.x EOL
Posted by Ted Wilmes <tw...@gmail.com>.
That makes good sense to me. I'd be honored to lead it off into the sunset.
--Ted
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Jorge Bay Gondra <jo...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 3.1 line is about 2 years old, I think its a lot of time for a relatively
> new project like TinkerPop.
> I'm in favor of making 3.1.8 the last release of the 3.1 branch.
>
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a new level
> > in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're about to
> > go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is about
> to
> > release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any kind on
> > the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev on
> 3.0.x).
> >
> > I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I thought I'd
> > start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last release
> > on that line of code?
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] 3.1.x EOL
Posted by Jorge Bay Gondra <jo...@gmail.com>.
3.1 line is about 2 years old, I think its a lot of time for a relatively
new project like TinkerPop.
I'm in favor of making 3.1.8 the last release of the 3.1 branch.
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Stephen Mallette <sp...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> We have taken backward compatibility and long term support to a new level
> in TinkerPop 3.x as compared with previous major versions. We're about to
> go on eight releases of the 3.1.x line of code. Now that 3.3.0 is about to
> release I'm wondering if we need to continue with support of any kind on
> the 3.1.x line (similar to how we stopped completely stopped dev on 3.0.x).
>
> I can expand this discussion to the user mailing list, but I thought I'd
> start here to see what people thought. Can we make 3.1.8 our last release
> on that line of code?
>