You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cassandra.apache.org by Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org> on 2017/01/13 17:21:21 UTC
[VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Hi all!
It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and moving
on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only (4.0), if the vote passes.
What do you think?
Thanks.
--
AY
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Brandon Williams <dr...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and
> moving
> on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
>
> In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
>
> Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
>
> All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only
> (4.0), if the vote passes.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> AY
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>.
I’m counting 6 binding PMC +1s, 4 non-binding +1s, and no -1s of any kind.
From now on, please skip merging into the 3.X branch on the way to trunk.
The new merge order: 2.1 -> 2.2 -> 3.0 -> 3.11 -> trunk.
I will take care of what’s currently in 3.X branch, NEWS, CHANGES, and JIRA fixversions
when 3.10 gets released.
Thank you.
--
AY
On 14 January 2017 at 21:35:35, Nate McCall (zznate.m@gmail.com) wrote:
+1
Thanks for bringing this up.
On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 6:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and moving
> on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
>
> In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
>
> Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
>
> All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only (4.0), if the vote passes.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> AY
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Nate McCall <zz...@gmail.com>.
+1
Thanks for bringing this up.
On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 6:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and moving
> on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
>
> In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
>
> Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
>
> All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only (4.0), if the vote passes.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> AY
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>.
In my opinion, stabilising MVs would count towards bug fixing, to totally acceptable
for the 3.11.X line. No conflict here.
--
AY
On 13 January 2017 at 17:56:06, Jonathan Haddad (jon@jonhaddad.com) wrote:
+1 (non binding) to feature freeze.
I also like the idea of stabilizing MVs. Ben, you've probably been the
most vocal about the issues, have you made any progress towards making them
work any better during bootstrap / etc? Any idea of fixing them is a major
undertaking?
Jon
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:39 AM Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>
wrote:
+1 also I appreciate any effort on MV stability. It is an official 3.x
feature but not production ready for the masses.
Am 13.01.2017 18:34 schrieb "Jonathan Ellis" <jb...@gmail.com>:
> +1
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all!
> >
> > It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11,
> and
> > moving
> > on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
> >
> > In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
> >
> > Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
> >
> > All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only
> > (4.0), if the vote passes.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > AY
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Ellis
> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> @spyced
>
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Jason Brown <ja...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>
wrote:
> Progress:
> Yes and no. I made a patch that made our cluster stable performance wise
> but introduces a consistency issue I am aware of. We can deal with it and I
> prefer this over severe performance problems. But this is nothing you can
> offer to regular users. I created a bunch of tickets related to this.
> Making bootstrap + decommision performant + consistent should not be much
> effort.
> Making repairs performant + consistent + fix incremental repairs will be
> probably more effort. I wanted to investigate more before xmas but did not
> find the time until now. It is on my agenda and I appreciate any support.
>
> Tickets I created recently:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13073
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13066
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13065
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13064
>
> Also important:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12888
>
>
> 2017-01-13 18:55 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Haddad <jo...@jonhaddad.com>:
>
> > +1 (non binding) to feature freeze.
> >
> > I also like the idea of stabilizing MVs. Ben, you've probably been the
> > most vocal about the issues, have you made any progress towards making
> them
> > work any better during bootstrap / etc? Any idea of fixing them is a
> major
> > undertaking?
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:39 AM Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > +1 also I appreciate any effort on MV stability. It is an official 3.x
> > feature but not production ready for the masses.
> >
> > Am 13.01.2017 18:34 schrieb "Jonathan Ellis" <jb...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <
> aleksey@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all!
> > > >
> > > > It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at
> 3.11,
> > > and
> > > > moving
> > > > on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
> > > >
> > > > In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X
> branch.
> > > >
> > > > Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
> > > >
> > > > All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk
> only
> > > > (4.0), if the vote passes.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > AY
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jonathan Ellis
> > > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> > > @spyced
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Benjamin Roth
> Prokurist
>
> Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
> Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
> Phone +49 7161 304880-6 · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
> AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer
>
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>.
Progress:
Yes and no. I made a patch that made our cluster stable performance wise
but introduces a consistency issue I am aware of. We can deal with it and I
prefer this over severe performance problems. But this is nothing you can
offer to regular users. I created a bunch of tickets related to this.
Making bootstrap + decommision performant + consistent should not be much
effort.
Making repairs performant + consistent + fix incremental repairs will be
probably more effort. I wanted to investigate more before xmas but did not
find the time until now. It is on my agenda and I appreciate any support.
Tickets I created recently:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13073
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13066
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13065
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13064
Also important:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12888
2017-01-13 18:55 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Haddad <jo...@jonhaddad.com>:
> +1 (non binding) to feature freeze.
>
> I also like the idea of stabilizing MVs. Ben, you've probably been the
> most vocal about the issues, have you made any progress towards making them
> work any better during bootstrap / etc? Any idea of fixing them is a major
> undertaking?
>
> Jon
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:39 AM Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>
> wrote:
>
> +1 also I appreciate any effort on MV stability. It is an official 3.x
> feature but not production ready for the masses.
>
> Am 13.01.2017 18:34 schrieb "Jonathan Ellis" <jb...@gmail.com>:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all!
> > >
> > > It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11,
> > and
> > > moving
> > > on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
> > >
> > > In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
> > >
> > > Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
> > >
> > > All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only
> > > (4.0), if the vote passes.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > --
> > > AY
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jonathan Ellis
> > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> > @spyced
> >
>
--
Benjamin Roth
Prokurist
Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
Phone +49 7161 304880-6 · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Jonathan Haddad <jo...@jonhaddad.com>.
+1 (non binding) to feature freeze.
I also like the idea of stabilizing MVs. Ben, you've probably been the
most vocal about the issues, have you made any progress towards making them
work any better during bootstrap / etc? Any idea of fixing them is a major
undertaking?
Jon
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:39 AM Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>
wrote:
+1 also I appreciate any effort on MV stability. It is an official 3.x
feature but not production ready for the masses.
Am 13.01.2017 18:34 schrieb "Jonathan Ellis" <jb...@gmail.com>:
> +1
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all!
> >
> > It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11,
> and
> > moving
> > on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
> >
> > In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
> >
> > Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
> >
> > All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only
> > (4.0), if the vote passes.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > AY
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Ellis
> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> @spyced
>
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>.
+1 also I appreciate any effort on MV stability. It is an official 3.x
feature but not production ready for the masses.
Am 13.01.2017 18:34 schrieb "Jonathan Ellis" <jb...@gmail.com>:
> +1
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all!
> >
> > It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11,
> and
> > moving
> > on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
> >
> > In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
> >
> > Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
> >
> > All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only
> > (4.0), if the vote passes.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > AY
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Ellis
> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> @spyced
>
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Jonathan Ellis <jb...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and
> moving
> on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
>
> In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
>
> Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
>
> All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only
> (4.0), if the vote passes.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> AY
--
Jonathan Ellis
co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
@spyced
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Jeff Jirsa <jj...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Josh McKenzie <jm...@apache.org>
wrote:
> +1
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Blake Eggleston <be...@apple.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On January 13, 2017 at 12:38:55 PM, Michael Shuler (
> michael@pbandjelly.org)
> > wrote:
> >
> > +1 to freeze with this clarified branch situation.
> >
> > --
> > Michael
> >
> > On 01/13/2017 11:53 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:
> > > To elaborate further, under the current consensus there would be no
> 3.12
> > release.
> > >
> > > Meaning that there are a few features that already made it to 3.X
> (3.12)
> > that would
> > > either:
> > >
> > > a) have to be reverted
> > > b) have to be discarded together with the remained of the 3.X branch
> > >
> > > If the vote goes through, I suggest we kill off the 3.X branch, and
> > cherry-pick the bug fixes
> > > that made it to 3.X back to the 3.11 branch.
> > >
> > > 3.11 branch will be the only one remaining.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-3.X/CHANGES.txt
> > >
> > > --
> > > AY
> > >
> > > On 13 January 2017 at 17:21:22, Aleksey Yeschenko (aleksey@apache.org)
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all!
> > >
> > > It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11,
> > and moving
> > > on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
> > >
> > > In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
> > >
> > > Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
> > >
> > > All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only
> > (4.0), if the vote passes.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > --
> > > AY
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Josh McKenzie <jm...@apache.org>.
+1
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Blake Eggleston <be...@apple.com>
wrote:
> +1
>
>
> On January 13, 2017 at 12:38:55 PM, Michael Shuler (michael@pbandjelly.org)
> wrote:
>
> +1 to freeze with this clarified branch situation.
>
> --
> Michael
>
> On 01/13/2017 11:53 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:
> > To elaborate further, under the current consensus there would be no 3.12
> release.
> >
> > Meaning that there are a few features that already made it to 3.X (3.12)
> that would
> > either:
> >
> > a) have to be reverted
> > b) have to be discarded together with the remained of the 3.X branch
> >
> > If the vote goes through, I suggest we kill off the 3.X branch, and
> cherry-pick the bug fixes
> > that made it to 3.X back to the 3.11 branch.
> >
> > 3.11 branch will be the only one remaining.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-3.X/CHANGES.txt
> >
> > --
> > AY
> >
> > On 13 January 2017 at 17:21:22, Aleksey Yeschenko (aleksey@apache.org)
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all!
> >
> > It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11,
> and moving
> > on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
> >
> > In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
> >
> > Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
> >
> > All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only
> (4.0), if the vote passes.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > AY
> >
>
>
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Blake Eggleston <be...@apple.com>.
+1
On January 13, 2017 at 12:38:55 PM, Michael Shuler (michael@pbandjelly.org) wrote:
+1 to freeze with this clarified branch situation.
--
Michael
On 01/13/2017 11:53 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:
> To elaborate further, under the current consensus there would be no 3.12 release.
>
> Meaning that there are a few features that already made it to 3.X (3.12) that would
> either:
>
> a) have to be reverted
> b) have to be discarded together with the remained of the 3.X branch
>
> If the vote goes through, I suggest we kill off the 3.X branch, and cherry-pick the bug fixes
> that made it to 3.X back to the 3.11 branch.
>
> 3.11 branch will be the only one remaining.
>
> https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-3.X/CHANGES.txt
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 13 January 2017 at 17:21:22, Aleksey Yeschenko (aleksey@apache.org) wrote:
>
> Hi all!
>
> It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and moving
> on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
>
> In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
>
> Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
>
> All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only (4.0), if the vote passes.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> AY
>
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Michael Shuler <mi...@pbandjelly.org>.
+1 to freeze with this clarified branch situation.
--
Michael
On 01/13/2017 11:53 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:
> To elaborate further, under the current consensus there would be no 3.12 release.
>
> Meaning that there are a few features that already made it to 3.X (3.12) that would
> either:
>
> a) have to be reverted
> b) have to be discarded together with the remained of the 3.X branch
>
> If the vote goes through, I suggest we kill off the 3.X branch, and cherry-pick the bug fixes
> that made it to 3.X back to the 3.11 branch.
>
> 3.11 branch will be the only one remaining.
>
> https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-3.X/CHANGES.txt
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 13 January 2017 at 17:21:22, Aleksey Yeschenko (aleksey@apache.org) wrote:
>
> Hi all!
>
> It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and moving
> on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
>
> In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
>
> Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
>
> All new features that haven\u2019t be committed yet should go to trunk only (4.0), if the vote passes.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> AY
>
Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze
Posted by Aleksey Yeschenko <al...@apache.org>.
To elaborate further, under the current consensus there would be no 3.12 release.
Meaning that there are a few features that already made it to 3.X (3.12) that would
either:
a) have to be reverted
b) have to be discarded together with the remained of the 3.X branch
If the vote goes through, I suggest we kill off the 3.X branch, and cherry-pick the bug fixes
that made it to 3.X back to the 3.11 branch.
3.11 branch will be the only one remaining.
https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-3.X/CHANGES.txt
--
AY
On 13 January 2017 at 17:21:22, Aleksey Yeschenko (aleksey@apache.org) wrote:
Hi all!
It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and moving
on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series.
In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch.
Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on.
All new features that haven’t be committed yet should go to trunk only (4.0), if the vote passes.
What do you think?
Thanks.
--
AY