geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Udo Kohlmeyer <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Time-based release schedule for minor releases
Date Mon, 08 Oct 2018 21:42:01 GMT
-0

It seems we have completely disregarded the *patch* version number. Does 
this mean Geode versions will be *major*,*minor*? Can we then remove the 
*patch* version on the release version?

In addition to this, should the test coverage not be sufficient enough 
to allow "release when green"? I must agree with @Jacob, I would prefer 
something a lot less formalized. If  the community has contributed a 
significant fix, should that not warrant an ad-hoc patch release? Or 
what if the community has added functionality, that could "fill" a 
single minor release by itself, should that not warrant a pre-emptive 
release.

All these questions are not enough to warrant this effort to be blocked, 
but I prefer those use cases to be considered for a more comprehensive 
documentation effort, than what is currently on the wiki.

In addition to that, is a release with only bug fixes in it, really 
still a worthy of minor release number, or does it not count as a patch 
release?

--Udo


On 10/8/18 14:27, Jacob Barrett wrote:
> +0
>
> My preference is to release when there is something worth releasing rather
> than arbitrary points in time but I don't hold that preference strongly
> enough to spike this effort.
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 2:24 PM Alexander Murmann <amurmann@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> As discussed in "Predictable minor release cadence", I'd like us to find
>> agreement on releasing a new minor version every three months. There are
>> more details in the other thread and I should have captured everything
>> relevant on the wiki:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Release+Schedule
>>
>> There are also some discussions about patch releases. Let's please focus
>> this vote on the proposed minor release schedule and carry on other
>> discussions in the [DISCUSS] thread.
>>
>> Thank you all!
>>


Mime
View raw message