Lazy consensus still requires a formal vote, just one that is declared to be
governed by lazy consensus.
I think we need to spend some time formalising our governance, so that we can
employ it confidently. At the very least, we should try to codify where we are
comfortable employing lazy consensus, and where we might want majority vote,
and where a veto is acceptable, since at present it's self-declared which is a
bit peculiar IMO. We might also want to codify the process for disputing a
lazy consensus vote that didn't receive enough participation / attention.
I personally felt the Jira changes were (accidentally) quite a successful model
for community decision-making, even if they were a bit higher traffic than we
might ordinarily desire - but there were a lot of technical details, and a lot
of opinions, which is probably uncommon. The successful feature, I think,
having been to solicit regular feedback in the form of non-binding +1/-1s on
each part of the proposal, before rolling them up into a formal vote
representing the collective decision-making. This lowered the bar to
participation, and increased the number of opportunities to participate, and
didn't require ongoing participation by any particular person. I'm unsure if
it could effectively be employed in other cases, but it might be worth a try.
This is also the goal of the CEP/CIP, and some people have also proposed
working groups. Wider user of lazy consensus fits into the same category, I
think. These are all attempts to improve the speed and quality of
decision-making on the project. I think codifying the rules of the project
would help as a starting point, but also simply recognising that participation
in decision-making is costly, and that proposers should understand that they
need to work to lower the cost of decision-making on their proposal, and that
we as a project need to figure out how to help them do this.
On 30/09/2019, 14:57, "Joshua McKenzie" <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote:
For what it's worth, lazy consensus is a very important concept in the
Apache Way <https://community.apache.org/committers/lazyConsensus.html>.
Methinks if we got a little more comfortable w/lazy consensus and majority
voting on process <https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html> we might
see some quicker evolution on the project.
Not to hijack the thread; just figured I'd point it out since it was on my
mind and it may not be common knowledge.
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 12:20 PM Sankalp Kohli <kohlisank...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Let’s put this to vote next week unless someone thinks it is not required
>
> > On Sep 25, 2019, at 10:56 AM, sankalp kohli <kohlisank...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Can we put it on vote(if required) if no one has more comments?
> >
> >> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:44 PM Jonathan Koppenhofer <
> j...@koppedomain.com> wrote:
> >> Nice work... I like this and have no additions/comments at this time
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 4:18 PM sankalp kohli <kohlisank...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > We added and changed a lot of things to this doc during a discussion
> in
> >> > NGCC. Can everyone take a look at it and provide feedback.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 10:51 PM Dinesh Joshi <djo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > I have left some comments on the document. Apart from a few
> >> > clarifications
> >> > > and some minor changes, I feel its in a good shape. I think we
> should
> >> > move
> >> > > forward with it. We can refine the process, definitions & criteria
> as we
> >> > > learn.
> >> > >
> >> > > Dinesh
> >> > >
> >> > > > On Sep 11, 2019, at 11:15 AM, Sumanth Pasupuleti <
> >> > > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > One more call for any additional comments/ feedback on the
release
> >> > > > lifecycle document
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit#
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > Sumanth
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 1:01 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti <
> >> > > > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Submitted patch to add release lifecycle information to the
> website
> >> > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15249
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:57 AM Oleksandr Petrov <
> >> > > >> oleksandr.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>> Maybe a bit off-topic:
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Before we cut a release, we should make sure we take care of
> beta
> >> > > protocol
> >> > > >>> [1], include released driver versions [2] and remove compact
> storage
> >> > > >>> remainders [3]. Third one is optional, but I'd argue we should
> do it
> >> > > >>> sooner
> >> > > >>> rather than later.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14973
> >> > > >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13951
> >> > > >>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13994
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 1:25 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti <
> >> > > >>> sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>>> Thanks for the feedback Scott. I have incorporated all the
> >> > incremental
> >> > > >>>> feedback I have thus far.
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>> Looking for any additional feedback folks may have.
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >
> >> >
>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit#
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:54 AM Scott Andreas <
> >> > sc...@paradoxica.net>
> >> > > >>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>>> Thanks for starting this discussion, Sumanth! Added a round
of
> >> > > >>> comments
> >> > > >>>> as
> >> > > >>>>> well.
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> Summarizing my non-binding feedback: I feel that many of the
> items
> >> > > >>> under
> >> > > >>>>> "Alpha" and "Beta" should be achieved prior to the release of
> an
> >> > > >>> alpha,
> >> > > >>>>> especially those related to correctness/safety, scope lock,
> feature
> >> > > >>>>> completeness, deprecation, and backwards compatibility.
> >> > Establishing
> >> > > a
> >> > > >>>>> higher standard for official project releases (even at the
> alpha
> >> > and
> >> > > >>> beta
> >> > > >>>>> stage) will help us really polish the final build together.
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> Ideally, I feel that contributors should have completed
> extensive
> >> > > >>>>> testing/validation to ensure that no critical or severe bugs
> exist
> >> > > >>> prior
> >> > > >>>> to
> >> > > >>>>> the release of an alpha (e.g., data loss, consistency
> violations,
> >> > > >>>> incorrect
> >> > > >>>>> responses to queries, etc). Perhaps we can add a line to this
> >> > effect.
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> Ensuring that we've met that bar prior to alpha will help us
> focus
> >> > > the
> >> > > >>>>> final stages of the release on gathering feedback from users
+
> >> > > >>> developers
> >> > > >>>>> to validate tooling and automation; compatibility with less
> >> > > >>> commonly-used
> >> > > >>>>> client libraries, testing new features, evaluating
> performance and
> >> > > >>>>> stability under their workloads, etc.
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> – Scott
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> On 6/11/19, 6:45 AM, "Sumanth Pasupuleti" <
> >> > > >>>>> sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> Thanks for the feedback on the product stages/ release
life
> >> > cycle
> >> > > >>>>> document.
> >> > > >>>>> I have incorporated the suggestions and looking for any
> >> > additional
> >> > > >>>>> feedback
> >> > > >>>>> folks may have.
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >
> >> >
>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit#
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> Thanks,
> >> > > >>>>> Sumanth
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 10:43 PM Scott Andreas <
> >> > > >>> sc...@paradoxica.net
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>> Echoing Jon’s point here –
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>> JH: “My thinking is I'd like to be able to recommend 4.0.0
> as a
> >> > > >>>>> production
> >> > > >>>>>> ready
> >> > > >>>>>> database for business critical cases”
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>> I feel that this is a standard that is both appropriate and
> >> > > >>>>> achievable,
> >> > > >>>>>> and one I’m legitimately excited about.
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>> Re: the current state of the test plan wiki in Confluence, I
> owe
> >> > > >>>>> another
> >> > > >>>>>> pass through. There has been a lot of progress here, but
I’ve
> >> > > >>> let
> >> > > >>>>> perfect
> >> > > >>>>>> be the enemy of the good in getting updates out. I’ll
> complete
> >> > > >>> that
> >> > > >>>>> pass
> >> > > >>>>>> later this week.
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>> Cheers,
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>> — Scott
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>> On May 28, 2019, at 10:48 AM, Dinesh Joshi <
> djo...@apache.org
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>> +1. Wiki could be useful to document what the overall plan.
> >> > > >>> Jira
> >> > > >>>> to
> >> > > >>>>>> track progress.
> >> > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>> Dinesh
> >> > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> On May 28, 2019, at 10:20 AM, Joshua McKenzie <
> >> > > >>>>> jmcken...@apache.org>
> >> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> The unofficial rule is to not upgrade to prod till .10 is
> >> > > >>> cut.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>> FWIW, I believe it's historically .6. Which is still not a
> >> > > >>> great
> >> > > >>>>> look
> >> > > >>>>>> for
> >> > > >>>>>>>> the project.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>> There's a ton of work going into testing 4.0 already.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>> While I intuitively and anecdotally (from the people I've
> >> > > >>>>> backchanneled
> >> > > >>>>>>>> with) believe this to be true as well, the referenced wiki
> >> > > >>>>> page[1] and
> >> > > >>>>>>>> jql[2] doesn't look like it's an up to date reflection of
> the
> >> > > >>>>> testing
> >> > > >>>>>>>> efforts going on. Is there another place this information
> is
> >> > > >>>>> stored /
> >> > > >>>>>>>> queryable we can surface to people to keep us all
> >> > > >>> coordinated?
> >> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>> [1]
> >> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >
> >> >
>
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/4.0+Quality%3A+Components+and+Test+Plans
> >> > > >>>>>>>> [2]
> >> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >
> >> >
>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14862?jql=project%20%3D%20CASSANDRA%20AND%20%20labels%20%3D%204.0-QA
> >> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:57 PM sankalp kohli <
> >> > > >>>>> kohlisank...@gmail.com>
> >> > > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Hi Jon,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> When you say 4.0 release, how do u match it with
> >> > > >>> 3.0
> >> > > >>>>> minor
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> releases. The unofficial rule is to not upgrade to prod
> till
> >> > > >>>> .10
> >> > > >>>>> is
> >> > > >>>>>> cut.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Also due to heavy investment in testing, I dont think it
> >> > > >>> will
> >> > > >>>>> take as
> >> > > >>>>>> long
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> as 3.0 but want to know what is your thinking with this.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Sankalp
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 9:40 AM Jon Haddad <
> >> > > >>> j...@jonhaddad.com
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Sept is a pretty long ways off. I think the ideal case
> is
> >> > > >>> we
> >> > > >>>>> can
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> announce
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 4.0 release at the summit. I'm not putting this as a
"do
> >> > > >>> or
> >> > > >>>>> die"
> >> > > >>>>>> date,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> and
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> I don't think we need to announce it or make promises.
> >> > > >>>>> Sticking with
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> "when
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> it's ready" is the right approach, but we need a target,
> >> > > >>> and
> >> > > >>>>> this is
> >> > > >>>>>> imo
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> a
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> good one.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> This date also gives us a pretty good runway. We could
> cut
> >> > > >>>> our
> >> > > >>>>> first
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> alphas in mid June / early July, betas in August and
> >> > > >>> release
> >> > > >>>> in
> >> > > >>>>> Sept.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> There's a ton of work going into testing 4.0 already.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Landing CASSANDRA-15066 will put us in a pretty good
> spot.
> >> > > >>>>> We've
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> developed
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> tooling at TLP that will make it a lot easier to spin up
> >> > > >>> dev
> >> > > >>>>> clusters
> >> > > >>>>>> in
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> AWS as well as stress test them. I've written about
> this a
> >> > > >>>> few
> >> > > >>>>> times
> >> > > >>>>>> in
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> the past, and I'll have a few blog posts coming up that
> >> > > >>> will
> >> > > >>>>> help show
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> this
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> in more details.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> There's some other quality of life things we should try
> to
> >> > > >>>>> hammer out
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> before then. Updating our default JVM settings would be
> >> > > >>> nice,
> >> > > >>>>> for
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> example. Improving documentation (the data modeling
> >> > > >>> section
> >> > > >>>> in
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> particular), fixing the dynamic snitch issues [1], and
> some
> >> > > >>>>>> improvements
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> to
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> virtual tables like exposing the sstable metadata [2],
> and
> >> > > >>>>> exposing
> >> > > >>>>>> table
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> statistics [3] come to mind. The dynamic snitch
> >> > > >>> improvement
> >> > > >>>>> will help
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> performance in a big way, and the virtual tables will go
> a
> >> > > >>>> long
> >> > > >>>>> way to
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> helping with quality of life. I showed a few folks
> virtual
> >> > > >>>>> tables at
> >> > > >>>>>> the
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> Accelerate conference last week and the missing table
> >> > > >>>>> statistics was a
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> big
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> shock. If we can get them in, it'll be a big help to
> >> > > >>>> operators.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> [1]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14459
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> [2]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14630
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> [3]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14572
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 2:36 PM Nate McCall <
> >> > > >>>>> zznat...@gmail.com>
> >> > > >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Sumanth,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you so much for taking the time to put this
> >> > > >>> together.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> -Nate
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 3:27 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti <
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I have taken an initial stab at documenting release
> types
> >> > > >>>> and
> >> > > >>>>> exit
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> criteria
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> in a google doc, to get us started, and to collaborate
> >> > > >>> on.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >
> >> >
>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit?usp=sharing
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sumanth
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 12:04 PM Dinesh Joshi <
> >> > > >>>>> djo...@apache.org>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sankalp,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Great point. This is the page created for testing.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >
> >> >
>
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/4.0+Quality%3A+Components+and+Test+Plans
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we need to define the various release types
> and
> >> > > >>> the
> >> > > >>>>> exit
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> criteria
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> for each type of release. Anybody want to take a stab
> at
> >> > > >>>>> this or
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> start
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> a
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> thread to discuss it?
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dinesh
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 23, 2019, at 11:57 AM, sankalp kohli <
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> kohlisank...@gmail.com>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a page where it is written what is expected
> >> > > >>> from
> >> > > >>>>> an
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> alpha,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beta, rc and a 4.0 release?
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also how are we coming up with Q4 2019 timeline. Is
> >> > > >>> this
> >> > > >>>> for
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> alpha,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> beta,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rc or 4.0 release?
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sankalp
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:27 AM Attila Wind
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> <attilaw@swf.technology
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1+1+1 I read a blog post was talking about last
> >> > > >>> sept(?)
> >> > > >>>> to
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> freeze
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> features and start extensive testing. Maybe its
> really
> >> > > >>>>> time to
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> hit
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> it!
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> :-)
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Attila Wind
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/attilaw
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile: +36 31 7811355
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2019. 05. 23. 19:30, ajs6f wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 in the fullest degree. A date that needs to be
> >> > > >>>> changed
> >> > > >>>>> is
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> still
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enormously more attractive than no date at all.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adam Soroka
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 23, 2019, at 12:01 PM, Sumanth Pasupuleti
<
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spasupul...@netflix.com.INVALID> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Having at least a ballpark target on the website
> >> > > >>> will
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> definitely
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> help.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on setting it to Q4 2019 for now.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 8:52 AM Dinesh Joshi <
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> djo...@apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 on setting a date.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dinesh
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 23, 2019, at 11:07 AM, Michael Shuler <
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> mich...@pbandjelly.org>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We've had 4.0 listed as TBD release date for a
> >> > > >>> very
> >> > > >>>>> long
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> time.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yesterday, Alexander Dejanovski got a "when's
> 4.0
> >> > > >>>>> going to
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> release?"
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question after his repair talk and he suggested
> >> > > >>>>> possibly Q4
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> 2019.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> This
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> morning Nate McCall hinted at possibly being
> close
> >> > > >>> by
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> ApacheCon
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Las
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vegas
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in September. These got me thinking..
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Think we can we shoot for having a 4.0
> >> > > >>> alpha/beta/rc
> >> > > >>>>> ready
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> to
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announce/release at ApacheCon? At that time,
> we'll
> >> > > >>>> have
> >> > > >>>>> been
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> frozen
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for 1
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> year, and I think we can. We'll GA release when
> >> > > >>> it's
> >> > > >>>>> ready,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> but I
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think Q4
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could be an realistic target.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With that said, I'd like to change "TBD" on the
> >> > > >>>>> downloads
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> page
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> to
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Est.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q4 2019". We can always push or pull the
> estimate,
> >> > > >>>> but I
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> think
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> it's
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time to
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a goal line. This lines up with ApacheCon
> >> > > >>> nicely
> >> > > >>>>> for a
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> preview
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release.
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any concerns or objections to editing the
> download
> >> > > >>>>> page?
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Have
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> some
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goal timeframe in mind?
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Warm regards,
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >> > > >>>>> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> > > >>>>>>>>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >> > > >>>>> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> > > >>>>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >> > > >>>> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> > > >>>>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> >> > > >>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>>
> >> > > >>>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> --
> >> > > >>> alex p
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
