drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sudheesh Katkam <skat...@maprtech.com>
Subject [DISCUSS] Apache Drill Version after 1.9.0, etc.
Date Mon, 28 Nov 2016 23:25:05 GMT
Hi all,


(A) I had asked the question about what the release version should be after 1.9.0. Since this
is part of the next release plan, a vote is required based on the discussion. For approval,
the vote requires a lazy majority of active committers over 3 days.

Here are some comments from that thread:

Quoting Paul:

> For release numbers, 1.10 (then 1.11, 1.12, …) seems like a good idea.
> At first it may seem odd to go to 1.10 from 1.9. Might people get confused between 1.10
and 1.1.0? But, there is precedence. Tomcat’s latest 7-series release is 7.0.72. Java is
on 8u112. And so on.
> I like the idea of moving to 2.0 later when the team introduces a major change, rather
than by default just because the numbers roll around. For example, Hadoop when to 2.x when
YARN was introduced. Impala appears to have moved to 2.0 when they added Spill to disk for
some (all?) operators.

Quoting Parth:

> Specifically what did you want to discuss about the release number after 1.9?  Ordinarily
you would just go to 2.0. The only reason for holding off on 2.0, that I can think of, is
if you want to make breaking changes in the 2.0 release and those are not going to be ready
for the next release cycle. Are any dev's planning on such breaking changes? If so we should
discuss that (or any other reason we might have for deferring 2.0) in a separate thread?
> I'm +0 on any version number we chose.

I am +1 on Paul’s suggestion for 1.10.0, unless, as Parth noted, we plan to make breaking
changes in the next release cycle.

@Jacques, any comments? You had mentioned about this a while back [1].


(B) Until discussion on (A) is complete, which may take a while, I propose we move the master
to 1.10.0-SNAPSHOT to unblock committing to master branch. If there are no objections, I will
do this tomorrow, once 1.9.0 release artifacts are propagated.


(C) I noticed there are some changes committed to master branch before the commit that moves
to the next snapshot version. Did we face this issue in the past? If so, how did we resolve
the issue? Is 'force push' an option?


Thank you,

[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/drill-dev/201604.mbox/%3CCAJrw0OTiXLnmW25K0aQtsVmh3A4vxfwZzvHntxeYJjPdd-PnYQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message