I agree w/ Bill and Corey. I don't think there is anything confusing about 1.5 < 1.6. Also if someone thinks of something that is confusing, we can document that on the website in release notes and/or on download page. I think its ok to make the 1.5.2 announcement independently from 1.6.1.
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:20 AM, Corey Nolet <[email protected]> wrote: > If we are concerned with confusion about adoption of new versions, we > should make a point to articulate the purpose very clearly in each of the > announcements. I was in the combined camp an hour ago and now I'm also > thinking we should keep them separate. > > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > > > No we did not bundle any release announcements prior. I also have to > agree > > with Bill -- I don't really see how there would be confusion with a > > properly worded announcement. > > > > Happy to work with anyone who has concerns in this regard to come up with > > something that is agreeable. I do think they should be separate. > > > > > > On 9/19/14, 1:02 AM, Mike Drob wrote: > > > >> Did we bundle 1.5.1/1.6.0? If not, they were fairly close together, I > >> think. Historically, we have not done a great job of distinguishing our > >> release lines, so that has led to confusion. Maybe I'm on the path to > >> talking myself out of a combined announcement here. > >> > >> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 9:57 PM, William Slacum < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Not to be a total jerk, but what's unclear about 1.5 < 1.6? Lots of > >>> projects have multiple release lines and it's not an issue. > >>> > >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Mike Drob <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 to combining. I've already had questions about upgrading to "this > >>>> > >>> latest > >>> > >>>> release" from somebody currently on the 1.6 line. Our release > narrative > >>>> > >>> is > >>> > >>>> not clear and we should not muddle the waters. > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> > >>>> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Should we wait to do a release announcement until 1.6.1, so we can > >>>>> > >>>> batch > >>> > >>>> the two? > >>>>> > >>>>> My main concern here is that I don't want to encourage new 1.5.x > >>>>> > >>>> adoption > >>> > >>>> when we have 1.6.x, and having two announcements could be confusing to > >>>>> > >>>> new > >>>> > >>>>> users who aren't sure which version to start using. We could issue an > >>>>> announcement that primarily mentions 1.6.1, and also mentions 1.5.2 > >>>>> > >>>> second. > >>>> > >>>>> That way, people will see 1.6.x as the stable/focus release, but will > >>>>> > >>>> still > >>>> > >>>>> inform 1.5.x users of updates. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Christopher L Tubbs II > >>>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> > >>>>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Vote passes with 3 +1's and nothing else. Huge thank you to those > who > >>>>>> > >>>>> made > >>>>> > >>>>>> the time to participate. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'll finish up the rest of the release work tonight. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 9/15/14, 12:24 PM, Josh Elser wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Devs, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Please consider the following candidate for Apache Accumulo 1.5.2 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Tag: 1.5.2rc1 > >>>>>>> SHA1: 039a2c28bdd474805f34ee33f138b009edda6c4c > >>>>>>> Staging Repository: > >>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > >>>>>>> orgapacheaccumulo-1014/ > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Source tarball: > >>>>>>> http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > >>>>>>> orgapacheaccumulo-1014/org/apache/accumulo/accumulo/1.5. > >>>>>>> 2/accumulo-1.5.2-src.tar.gz > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Binary tarball: > >>>>>>> http://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ > >>>>>>> orgapacheaccumulo-1014/org/apache/accumulo/accumulo/1.5. > >>>>>>> 2/accumulo-1.5.2-bin.tar.gz > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> (Append ".sha1", ".md5" or ".asc" to download the signature/hash > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> for a > >>> > >>>> given artifact.) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Signing keys available at: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> https://www.apache.org/dist/accumulo/KEYS > >>> > >>>> > >>>>>>> Over 1.5.1, we have 109 issues resolved > >>>>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=accumulo.git;a= > >>>>>>> blob;f=CHANGES;h=c2892d6e9b1c6c9b96b2a58fc901a76363ece8b0;hb= > >>>>>>> 039a2c28bdd474805f34ee33f138b009edda6c4c > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Testing: all unit and functional tests are passing and ingested 1B > >>>>>>> entries using CI w/ agitation over rc0. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Vote will be open until Friday, August 19th 12:00AM UTC (8/18 > 8:00PM > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> ET, > >>>> > >>>>> 8/18 5:00PM PT) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - Josh > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> >
