Indeed, that's a vary good signal.
I propose we start with the 2.7 branch (which has been out in the wild for a bit and seems pretty stable), supported for 6 months (from now?). We should gather a list of issues, if any, that merit backporting. On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 11:07 AM Maximilian Michels <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > The result shows that there is a demand for an LTS release. > > +1 for using an existing release. How about six months for the initial > LTS release? I think it shouldn't be too long for the first one to give > us a chance to make changes to the model. > > -Max > > On 02.11.18 17:26, Ahmet Altay wrote: > > Twitter vote concluded with 52 votes with the following results: > > - 52% Stable LTS releases > > - 46% Upgrade to latest release > > - 2% Keep using older releases > > > > This reads like another supporting evidence for making LTS releases. In > > the light of this, what do you all think about Kenn's proposal of making > > existing branch an LTS branch? > > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com > > <mailto:al...@google.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 3:03 PM, Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org > > <mailto:k...@apache.org>> wrote: > > > > Yes, user@ cannot reach new users, really. Twitter might, if we > > have enough of adjacent followers to get it in front of the > > right people. On the other hand, I find testimonials from > > experience convincing in this case. > > > > > > I agree I am not sure how much additional input we will get from a > > twitter poll. Started one anyway > > (https://twitter.com/ApacheBeam/status/1055598972423684096 > > <https://twitter.com/ApacheBeam/status/1055598972423684096>). I used > > Thomas's version as the basis and had to shorten it to fit the > > character limits. > > > > > > Kenn > > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 2:59 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com > > <mailto:al...@google.com>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 9:16 AM, Thomas Weise > > <t...@apache.org <mailto:t...@apache.org>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 2:42 PM Ahmet Altay > > <al...@google.com <mailto:al...@google.com>> wrote: > > > > We attempted to collect feedback on the mailing > > lists but did not get much input. From my experience > > (mostly based on dataflow) there is a sizeable group > > of users who are less interested in new features and > > want a version that is stable, that does not have > > security issues, major data integrity issues etc. In > > Beam's existing release model that corresponds to > > the latest release. > > > > It would help a lot if we can hear the perspectives > > of other users who are not present here through the > > developers who work with them. > > > > > > Perhaps user@ and Twitter are good ways to reach > > relevant audience. > > > > > > We tried user@ before did not get any feedback [1]. Polling > > on twitter sounds like a good idea. Unless there is an > > objection, I can start a poll with Thomas's proposed text as > > is on Beam's twitter account. > > > > [1] > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7d890d6ed221c722a95d9c773583450767b79ee0c0c78f48a56c7eba@%3Cuser.beam.apache.org%3E > > > > <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7d890d6ed221c722a95d9c773583450767b79ee0c0c78f48a56c7eba@%3Cuser.beam.apache.org%3E> > > > > > > A poll could look like this: > > > > The Beam community is considering LTS (Long Term > > Support) for selected releases. LTS releases would only > > contain critical bug fixes (security, data integrity > > etc.) and offer an alternative to upgrading to latest > > Beam release with new features. Please indicate your > > preference for Beam upgrades: > > > > 1) Always upgrading to the latest release because I need > > latest features along with bug fixes > > 2) Interested to switch to LTS releases to obtain > > critical fixes > > 3) Not upgrading (using older release for other reasons) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
