On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com> wrote:

[ ... ]

> If they're not close to finished now why even consider them for
> the 4.0 release?  They're so core they should be merged into trunk at the
> beginning of the cycle for the follow up release in order to get as much
> exposure as possible.

This sounds right to me.  Bigger, destabilizing changes should land at
the beginning of the cycle; Setting up a mad rush at the end of a
release cycle does not yield favorable results (we've done this, we

> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:46 PM Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I'd like to see pluggable storage and transient replica tickets land, for
>> > starters.
>> I think both those features are, frankly, necessary for our future. On
>> the other hand, they both have the following risks:
>> 1. core behavioral changes
>> 2. require changing a (relatively) large surface area of code
>> We can aim to de-risk 4.0 by focusing on what we have now which is
>> solid repair and NIO internode (maybe we move the 4.0 branch timeline
>> up?), aiming for a 4.1 following soon-ish.
>> Or we can go in eyes open and agree on a larger footprint 4.0.
>> I'm on the fence, tbh (can't emphasize enough how big both those
>> features will be). I just want everyone to know what we are getting
>> into and that we are potentially impacting our goals of "stable" ==
>> "exciting."

Unfortunately, when stability suffers things get "exciting" for all
sorts of unintended reasons.  I'm personally not umm, excited, by that

Eric Evans

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org

Reply via email to