An LTS only makes sense if we end up patching the LTS, which so far we
have never done. There has been work done in backporting fixes, see
https://github.com/apache/beam/commits/release-2.7.1 but the effort was
never completed. The main reason I believe were complications with
running the evolved release scripts against old Beam versions.
Now that the portability layer keeps maturing, it makes me optimistic
that we might have a maintained LTS in the future.
-Max
On 19.09.19 08:40, Ismaël Mejía wrote:
The fact that end users never asked AFAIK in the ML for an LTS and for
a subsequent minor release of the existing LTS shows IMO the low
interest on having a LTS.
We still are heavily iterating in many areas (portability/schema) and
I am not sure users (and in particular users of open source runners)
get a big benefit of relying on an old version. Maybe this is the
moment to reconsider if having a LTS does even make sense given (1)
that our end user facing APIs are 'mostly' stable (even if many still
called @Experimental). (2) that users get mostly improvements on
runners translation and newer APIs with a low cost just by updating
the version number, and (3) that in case of any regression in an
intermediary release we still can do a minor release even if we have
not yet done so, let's not forget that the only thing we need to do
this is enough interest to do the release from the maintainers.
On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 12:00 AM Valentyn Tymofieiev
<valen...@google.com> wrote:
I support nominating 2.16.0 as LTS release since in has robust Python 3 support compared
with prior releases, and also for reasons of pending Python 2 deprecation. This has been
discussed before [1]. As Robert pointed out in that thread, LTS nomination in Beam is
currently retroactive. If we keep the retroactive policy, the question is how long we
should wait for a release to be considered "safe" for nomination. Looks like
in case of 2.7.0 we waited a month, see [2,3].
Thanks,
Valentyn
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/eba6caa58ea79a7ecbc8560d1c680a366b44c531d96ce5c699d41535@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
[2] https://beam.apache.org/blog/2018/10/03/beam-2.7.0.html
[3]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/896cbc9fef2e60f19b466d6b1e12ce1aeda49ce5065a0b1156233f01@%3Cdev.beam.apache.org%3E
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 2:46 PM Austin Bennett <whatwouldausti...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi All,
According to our policies page [1]: "There will be at least one new LTS release in a
12 month period, and LTS releases are considered deprecated after 12 months"
The last LTS was released 2018-10-02 [2].
Does that mean the next release (2.16) should be the next LTS? It looks like
we are in danger of not living up to that promise.
Cheers,
Austin
[1] https://beam.apache.org/community/policies/
[2] https://beam.apache.org/get-started/downloads/
