> On Dec 18, 2018, at 3:55 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote:
> First, I want to give a big thanks to everyone who's been slogging through 
> the backlog of changes over the last few months. It's really exciting to see 
> progress again.
> 
> What are folks thinking about in terms of releases? I'm particularly 
> interested in what the currently active contributors and committers are 
> looking for?
> 
> * Is a major release (i.e. 1.9) the main focus?
> * Anyone already looking at getting existing minor release lines going again 
> (i.e. 1.7 or 1.8)?
> * Are there any major blockers to doing one or more of the above now, or are 
> folks trying to complete a pass of everything before looking at releases?

I’m mostly trying to get things ready for a 1.9 release.    That’s mostly 
digging through the open PR’s and reducing the backlog.   There are still a 
bunch of Java and Python things left to dig through, but we’re down from over 
140 PR’s to under 40 now so a lot of progress has been made.      I thought 
Thiru was also going to look at some of the C++11 updates, but I haven’t see 
that happen yet.

I’m not looking at 1.7/1.8 at all.   


> I ask because I may have a bit of time for doing release manager duties.
> 
> In my experience it's better to release often rather than wait for the 
> perfect time, but I understand that there's a big backlog of expectations so 
> folks might not be feeling great about their changes coming in for a future 
> release when we don't have a history of a steady release cadence.
> 
> Maybe folks with a more up to date view of the backlog than me have a better 
> idea about what things still under review might necessitate a major version 
> increment, so that we might try to get them all into 1.9?

Well, the python updates are kind of a hold up right now as I don’t know enough 
python to really review them well.   The C++11 updates would also be good to 
get done in 1.9.  SOME of the c++11 things are done, but I think there was some 
other updates that Thiru was considering.   Not really sure though.   I also 
want to re-look at https://github.com/apache/avro/pull/259 
<https://github.com/apache/avro/pull/259> as that is also a breaking change 
that I would like to get in for 1.9, however it’s now completely out of date 
and may need a full re-do.   



-- 
Daniel Kulp
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> - http://dankulp.com/blog 
<http://dankulp.com/blog>
Talend Community Coder - http://talend.com <http://coders.talend.com/>

Reply via email to