Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-kafka-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-kafka-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 17F519A2B for ; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 01:11:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 23411 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jun 2012 01:11:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-kafka-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 23370 invoked by uid 500); 7 Jun 2012 01:11:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact kafka-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 23356 invoked by uid 99); 7 Jun 2012 01:11:16 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 01:11:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of neha.narkhede@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.213.47] (HELO mail-yw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.213.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 01:11:08 +0000 Received: by yhjj56 with SMTP id j56so51624yhj.6 for ; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 18:10:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=p9QgMpp3VjDgVAxGisIuhWmLR3nX4kmGqmOhBtcAMOk=; b=yVtz9P5Mxv6a1KGMe+liwf+yWorKM5ng1vop3KUYQyld+9TL/5fV4y0FTcuCElNMwJ gHhDm5tZe18BIt+7lmNj/aLNZuSQNFBW5UxQ64T1MIV7ygtN7xqtkBURCrUR1r19JxE6 Gqj22XsSRMVnvYy1DqrD42WeDRRvT8nJd9uoLGS9/4a+B5KWyDs1FtWlVp++/ZQ3oquX r59r7GdnJWLfOya5oQ9Bg8OoWLo0mzPQ2+9rGxMO9g45KKFUjfPOaNwwHxNrJwHhFGnT 1sn7o4CnNqGsKhzXx3mscWyLCwikhpLTlHeUA93/OelvcrAYEfWeh3/oQ5H/wfBsvIG9 KGIw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.100.137 with SMTP id ey9mr100993igb.61.1339031447641; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 18:10:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.24.166 with HTTP; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 18:10:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4FCEBDA2.3000505@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 18:10:47 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Graduate from incubator? From: Neha Narkhede To: kafka-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f23532bc79f9604c1d78d50 --e89a8f23532bc79f9604c1d78d50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I like option 1 since going with option 1 might make the next release go smoother. Thanks, Neha On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Joel Koshy wrote: > I think an 0.7.1 release would be suitable in any case given that there are > few additional features and API changes since 0.7.0 - I can drive that, > although an 0.7.1 release need not necessarily hold up pursuing graduation > if people prefer (1). > > Joel > > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Jay Kreps wrote: > > > This is a fair point. I am not sure of the best practices on the number > of > > releases to do before graduation. The Incubator docs imply a fairly low > > bar: > > "Projects need to cut releases. Apache projects need to understand how to > > cut Apache releases. Therefore it is an important step during your stay > in > > the incubator to demonstrate the ability to create an Apache Release. > > Podlings > > do not need to actually *publish* a release to demonstrate that they > > understand how to accomplish such a feat. However, creating a release > that > > is approved by the incubator project management > > committee< > > > http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Roles_and_Responsibilities.html#Incubator+Project+Management+Committee+%28PMC%29 > > > > > is usually the simplest way to do this." > > (http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#releases) > > > > They refer to "a release" not "releases", and mention that they don't > > particularly care if you publish it or not. We might want to set a higher > > bar for ourselves, though. > > > > We had planned on having 0.8 be the next release, and that is still a few > > months out I suspect. However we did take a number of minor features and > > fixes post 0.7 that are only on trunk it would probably be possible to > do a > > 0.7.1 without too much drama and that would make that work available to > > people in a more easily consumable form . On the other hand it would be > > nice to just be heads down and focus on 0.8 too. So if people agree with > > Chris's feedback there are three options: > > > > 1. Pursue graduation now > > 2. Do a 0.7.1 release, pursue graduation when that is completed > > 3. Wait until 0.8 is out, pursue graduation after that > > > > Anyone have a strong preference for one of these options? > > > > -Jay > > > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Chris Burroughs > > wrote: > > > > > On 2012-05-23 23:32, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: > > > >> We struggled a bit with licensing and packaging issues but we got > > those > > > >> issues resolved and did a release and this should be pretty easy > going > > > >> forward. > > > > > > This is the one point I am hesitant about. I think it would be > > > reasonable to ask us for a history of more than a single release (and > > > I'm not sure we got the mirror situation 100% right yet). We sure we > > > got this one? > > > > > > For the more important parts, It's exciting to see the community grow > > > (particular the diversity part, that's a great accomplishment and I > know > > > takes significant commitment). On that note I would be interested in > > > hearing from other committers about graduation. > > > > > > --e89a8f23532bc79f9604c1d78d50--