cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Phil Yang <>
Subject Re: 3.0 and the Cassandra release process
Date Wed, 15 Apr 2015 04:53:50 GMT
Hi Jonathan,

How long will tick-tock releases will be maintained? Do users have to
upgrade to a new even release with new features to fix the bugs in an older
even release?

2015-04-14 6:28 GMT+08:00 Jonathan Ellis <>:

> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Jonathan Ellis <> wrote:
> >
> > I’m optimistic that as we improve our process this way, our even releases
> > will become increasingly stable.  If so, we can skip sub-minor releases
> > (3.2.x) entirely, and focus on keeping the release train moving.  In the
> > meantime, we will continue delivering 2.1.x stability releases.
> >
> The weak point of this plan is the transition from the "big release"
> development methodology culminating in 3.0, to the monthly tick-tock
> releases.  Since 3.0 needs to go through a beta/release candidate phase,
> during which we're going to be serious about not adding new features, that
> means that 3.1 will come with multiple months worth of features, so right
> off the bat we're starting from a disadvantage from a stability standpoint.
> Recognizing that it will take several months for the tick-tock releases to
> stabilize, I would like to ship 3.0.x stability releases concurrently with
> 3.y tick-tock releases.  This should stabilize 3.0.x faster than tick-tock,
> while at the same time hedging our bets such that if we assess tick-tock in
> six months and decide it's not delivering on its goals, we're not six
> months behind in having a usable set of features that we shipped in 3.0.
> So, to summarize:
> - New features will *only* go into tick-tock releases.
> - Bug fixes will go into tick-tock releases and a 3.0.x branch, which will
> be maintained for at least a year
> --
> Jonathan Ellis
> Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
> co-founder,
> @spyced

Phil Yang

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