storm-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Derek Dagit <da...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Next 2.x release
Date Thu, 08 Aug 2019 22:15:18 GMT
What do we think about defining Long-Term Support branches with a fixed
period of support?

For example, we could say 2.0.x is an LTS release line with support
ending no earlier than a certain calendar date.

The date could be extended, and it might ultimately be governed by the
timing of the subsequent release (e.g., 2.1.x or 3.0.x). Keeping things
clear would imply semantic versioning as mentioned earlier
(https://semver.org/).

Apache Traffic Server does something like this, to name one project:

https://trafficserver.apache.org/downloads

Having a regular cadence of releases might also help make the process
easier and help set expectations for users and devs.

-- 
Derek

On Thu, Aug 08, 2019 at 02:50:07PM -0500, Ethan Li wrote:
> 
> Currently we don’t have a 2.0.x-branch and master is actually “2.0.1-SNAPSHOT”.
> 
> So if we  do a 2.1.0 release,  we will create a 2.1.x-branch based on current master,
release from there. And we change master to “2.2.0-SNAPSHOT”.
> 
> But we will have one problem: we will lose 2.0.x release line.
> 
> There are two things I can do:
> 
> 1) create a 2.0.x-branch based on v2.0.0 tag.
> 
> 2) ignore it. If there is an issue with 2.0.x release,  ask users to upgrade to 2.1.0.
> 
> I prefer 1) but not sure if it’s the right way to make things right. Or please let
me know if I misunderstood something and it’s not an issue.
> 
> Btw, I am seeing the same issue with 1.x-branch. We shouldn’t have 1.x-branch. Instead,
we should have 1.2.x-branch. But this is not a problem since we will not release 1.3.x.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ethan
> 
> 
> > On Aug 7, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Ethan Li <ethanopensource@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yes thanks.
> >
> >> On Aug 7, 2019, at 10:39 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing <stigdoessing@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>
> >> Sounds great. Remember to add your key to
> >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS, you should be able
> >> to update it with an SVN client. See also
> >> https://www.apache.org/dev/openpgp.html#update.
> >>
> >> Den ons. 7. aug. 2019 kl. 15.05 skrev Ethan Li <ethanopensource@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> I got my pgp key signed by Bryan W. Call <bcall@apache.org <mailto:
> >>> bcall@apache.org>> (Thanks to him).
> >>>
> >>> My pgp key:
> >>> http://pgp.surfnet.nl/pks/lookup?op=vindex&fingerprint=on&search=0xA4A672F11B5050C8
> >>> <
> >>> http://pgp.surfnet.nl/pks/lookup?op=vindex&fingerprint=on&search=0xA4A672F11B5050C8
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> My understanding is that I am good to do release with this key now.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Here is a list of PRs that we might want to include in the new release:
> >>>
> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3098 <
> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3098>
> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3096 <
> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3096>
> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 <
> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Please review if you get a chance.  Thanks
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Ethan
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Aug 1, 2019, at 4:19 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing <stigdoessing@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks Ethan, yes 2.1.0 makes sense.
> >>>>
> >>>> Den man. 29. jul. 2019 kl. 23.43 skrev Ethan Li <
> >>> ethanopensource@gmail.com>:
> >>>>
> >>>>> It’s a good point. I will start a discussion thread for it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For the new release, I went through the list:
> >>>>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1
> >>>>> <
> >>>>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20=%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20=%202.0.1
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We introduced some new functionalities, including
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2720 <
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2720>
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3412 <
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3412>
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3411 <
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3411>
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3442 <
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3442>
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3396 <
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3396>
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3392 <
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3392>
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3395 <
> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3395>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So I think we should release 2.1.0 rather than 2.0.1.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There are a few pull requests we may want to review before the next
> >>>>> release:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3094 <
> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3094>
> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990 <
> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990>
> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 <
> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks
> >>>>> Ethan
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Jul 29, 2019, at 10:11 AM, Hugo Louro <hmclouro@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think it would facilitate more frequent releases to summarize
in a
> >>> page
> >>>>>> the testing that all contributors/committers do in anticipation
of the
> >>>>>> release, plus any "new" testing that may become relevant for
the newer
> >>>>>> releases. Doing so would make it easy to create a check form
or or
> >>> email
> >>>>>> template that what we feel should be done to guarantee a stable
> >>> release.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> Hugo
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 7:15 AM Ethan Li <ethanopensource@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks Stig. I will look into it.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 3:06 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing <
> >>>>> stigdoessing@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I think ideally we've been trying for semver, but it's
been pretty
> >>>>> loose,
> >>>>>>>> e.g. there were breaking changes in one of the 1.2.x
releases for
> >>>>>>>> storm-kafka-client. I don't know what rules we've actually
been
> >>> using,
> >>>>> if
> >>>>>>>> any.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Semver for binary compatibility would probably be a
good rule of
> >>> thumb.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Den fre. 26. jul. 2019 kl. 20.01 skrev Ethan Li <
> >>>>>>> ethanopensource@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Stig,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Do you know what’s the versioning standard we
have been following
> >>> (to
> >>>>>>>>> determine a 2.0.1 release or 2.1.0 release) ?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 12:26 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing
<
> >>>>>>> stigdoessing@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Sounds great, thanks Ethan.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Den fre. 26. jul. 2019 kl. 19.16 skrev Ethan
Li <
> >>>>>>>>> ethanopensource@gmail.com>:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> It’s good idea to do more frequent release.
I can run the next
> >>>>>>> release.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I will take a look at both PRs. Other than
that, I think we should
> >>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>> get https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093
<
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093>
 in the new release.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 11:58 AM, Stig Rohde
Døssing <
> >>>>>>>>> stigdoessing@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we've talked about more frequent
releases before.
> >>> Releasing
> >>>>>>> new
> >>>>>>>>>>>> versions every few months means people
don't have to wait long
> >>> for
> >>>>>>>>> fixes
> >>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> get out, and smaller releases are probably
also easier for users
> >>> to
> >>>>>>> get
> >>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> grips with (the fix list for 2.0.0 is
enormous).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> With that in mind, I think we should
start looking at the next
> >>> 2.x
> >>>>>>>>>>> release
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (2.0.1 or 2.1.0?), since it's been a
couple of months since 2.0.0
> >>>>>>>>>>> released.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The fix list would be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1
> >>>>>>>>>>>> .
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Govind and Ethan have offered to run
the next release, and help
> >>>>>>>>> validate
> >>>>>>>>>>>> our release process guidelines. Would
one of you have time to
> >>> work
> >>>>>>> on a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> release in the near future?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> It would be good to take a look at currently
open PRs and decide
> >>>>>>> which
> >>>>>>>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>>>> feel need to get merged before the next
release.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to see at least
> >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990
> >>>>>>>>>>>> merged
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878
seems like it's close
> >>> to
> >>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mergeable too?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> 

Mime
View raw message