drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Release cadence
Date Wed, 07 Sep 2016 18:24:02 GMT
+1 on the versioning scheme and the rest.



--
Jacques Nadeau
CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Parth Chandra <parthc@apache.org> wrote:

> Completely agree with you on allowing a release if the need is felt. The
> general release cadence would provide predictability, as you said, but we
> absolutely should be able to do releases with fixes if we need to.
> I would suggest we use a numbering of *major.minor*  for the regular
> releases and a *major.minor.revision *for any release outside of that.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm +1 for communicating to the user community a particular expected
> > release cadence. It helps set expectations. I'm +0 on 3 months being what
> > is communicated.
> >
> > I'm -1 on this being a reason to vote down a release proposed by someone.
> > If a member of the PMC wants to start a release because they perceive a
> > need, they should be able to. A general release cadence is not a reason
> to
> > vote down a release.
> >
> > --
> > Jacques Nadeau
> > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Parth Chandra <parthc@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > As we discussed in the hangout today, based on the last few releases,
> it
> > > looks like a slightly longer time period between releases is probably
> > > called for. The 1.7 release was almost four months and folks had
> started
> > > asking questions about the release while the 1.8 release was done in
> much
> > > less time and we found quite a few show stopper issues at the last
> > minute.
> > > It seems that a three month cycle is probably appropriate at this time
> > > since that does not keep folks waiting for a new release and also
> > provides
> > > enough time for the team to test things thoroughly before a release.
> > >
> > > What does everyone think?
> > >
> > > Parth
> > >
> >
>

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