Hello!  We've started and stopped this discussion a couple of times --
but it ends up getting a bit bogged down in details, and there's so
much going on that we end on sticking with the status quo!

I would love to have this discussion again though and come to a
conclusion.  We could be doing quite a few things better, and changing
our release strategy to a more flexible and modern style is likely
going to make things easier for us in the long run.

Among the related topics are:

1) Moving to more recognizable semantic versioning (i.e., dropping the
"1." prefix in Avro).
2) Versioning the website and specification for releases.
3) Supporting N minor releases simultaneously (where N is more than 1)
4) Splitting the language SDKs to separate releases and releasing separately.

Just for reference, I always like to link the thread to the last time
we discussed (which links to the previous years). There's quite a few
good points!  I don't think we can ever really satisfy everyone, but
we can definitely make changes.

Maybe a good way to get to consensus would be to list the possible
actions we could take, and prioritize them?

Thanks for bringing this up and HAPPY NEW YEAR everybody!

Ryan

[1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread/rybf7vb514mtkr7swfld7b06g1kb2r3t
"[DISCUSS] Releases, versioning and lifecycle"


On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 1:05 PM Oscar Westra van Holthe - Kind
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 at 08:15, Martin Grigorov <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [...] the problem is the availability of active maintainers.
>
> This is another issue, and important too IMHO. I'm just not certain there's
> a solution though.
> I'll raise another thread if I ever have ideas to tackle it.
>
> Kind regards,
> Oscar
>
> --
>
> ✉️ Oscar Westra van Holthe - Kind <[email protected]>

Reply via email to