cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0
Date Thu, 17 Nov 2016 17:03:50 GMT
Jason,

That's a separate topic, but we will have a different vote on how the
branching/release strategy should be for the future.

On Thursday, November 17, 2016, jason zhao yang <zhaoyangsingapore@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Will we still use tick-tock release for 4.x and 4.0.x ?
>
> Stefan Podkowinski <spodxx@gmail.com <javascript:;>>于2016年11月16日周三
> 下午4:52写道:
>
> > From my understanding, this will also effect EOL dates of other branches.
> >
> > "We will maintain the 2.2 stability series until 4.0 is released, and 3.0
> > for six months after that.".
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Nate McCall <zznate.m@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > > Agreed. As long as we have a goal I don't see why we have to adhere to
> > > arbitrary date for 4.0.
> > >
> > > On Nov 16, 2016 1:45 PM, "Aleksey Yeschenko" <aleksey@datastax.com
> <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I’ll comment on the broader issue, but right now I want to elaborate
> on
> > > > 3.11/January/arbitrary cutoff date.
> > > >
> > > > Doesn’t matter what the original plan was. We should continue with
> 3.X
> > > > until all the 4.0 blockers have been
> > > > committed - and there are quite a few of them remaining yet.
> > > >
> > > > So given all the holidays, and the tickets remaining, I’ll personally
> > be
> > > > surprised if 4.0 comes out before
> > > > February/March and 3.13/3.14. Nor do I think it’s an issue.
> > > >
> > > > —
> > > > AY
> > > >
> > > > On 16 November 2016 at 00:39:03, Mick Semb Wever (
> > mick@thelastpickle.com <javascript:;>
> > > )
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 4 November 2016 at 13:47, Nate McCall <zznate.m@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Specifically, this should be "new stuff that could/will break
> things"
> > > > > given we are upping
> > > > > the major version.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > How does this co-ordinate with the tick-tock versioning¹ leading up
> to
> > > the
> > > > 4.0 release?
> > > >
> > > > To just stop tick-tock and then say yeehaa let's jam in all the
> > breaking
> > > > changes we really want seems to be throwing away some of the learnt
> > > wisdom,
> > > > and not doing a very sane transition from tick-tock to
> > > > features/testing/stable². I really hope all this is done in a way
> that
> > > > continues us down the path towards a stable-master.
> > > >
> > > > For example, are we fixing the release of 4.0 to November? or
> > continuing
> > > > tick-tocks until we complete the 4.0 roadmap? or starting the
> > > > features/testing/stable branching approach with 3.11?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Background:
> > > > ¹) Sylvain wrote in an earlier thread titled "A Home for 4.0"
> > > >
> > > > > And as 4.0 was initially supposed to come after 3.11, which is
> > coming,
> > > > it's probably time to have a home for those tickets.
> > > >
> > > > ²) The new versioning scheme slated for 4.0, per the "Proposal -
> 3.5.1"
> > > > thread
> > > >
> > > > > three branch plan with “features”, “testing”, and “stable”
starting
> > > with
> > > > 4.0?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mick
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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