accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Plan for next release
Date Thu, 25 Aug 2016 14:13:27 GMT
I'm going to change my vote to -1. I had hoped it would clearly swing one
way or the other, but it seems we're much more split on the issue. At this
point, I'd rather carry through with the previous lazy consensus release
plans of having a 1.8.0, with the understanding that we're not going to
plan for a 1.9.0 minor release... instead opting for a 2.0.0 with
conservative deprecation removals as our next major/minor release.

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:04 AM Drew Farris <drew@apache.org> wrote:

> -1 (binding) on this - Lets move ahead with getting the current set of new
> features packaged into a Java 7 compatible 1.8.0 release and clearly
> declare our goal to move exclusively Java 8 in the next major release. New
> features can be implemented with Java 8 specifics soonest because we've
> nailed down a 1.8 baseline
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 12:37 PM Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Please just let people vote, Christopher. We don't need to have the
> > continued chatter on every vote being cast...
> >
> > Christopher wrote:
> > > That was previously proposed and discussed, and the argument against it
> > was
> > > that it would either increase our support burden or we'd have to
> > > prematurely EOL 1.7.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016, 10:51 ivan bella<ivan@ivan.bella.name>  wrote:
> > >
> > >> If 1.8 and 2.0 are so close, then just release both back to back.  I
> am
> > >> perfectly willing to step up and help testing if that is such a burden
> > on
> > >> the community.
> > >>
> > >> I give a -1 (non-binding) vote in this regard.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> On August 23, 2016 at 10:21 AM "Marc P."<marc.parisi@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Correct to -1 ( non-binding ). In spirit of Dave's response I'll
> leave
> > it
> > >>> that my opinion was swayed following the discussion.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'll also readily admit that perhaps I hadn't fully digested the
> > >> arguments
> > >>> previously but this thread helped cement my opinion.
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 10:09 AM, Sean Busbey<busbey@cloudera.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Marc P.<marc.parisi@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>> I think there is value in commenting because after Reading
the
> > >> responses
> > >>>>> last night I was swayed to -1. Perhaps others might be as well.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Sorry Marc, just for clarification are you changing your +1 vote
to
> > -1?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I ask because I didn't see an email prior to this one that did
that.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> busbey
> > >>>>
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message