btw if we release Cassandra quarterly then for subprojects it will be at most 3 months until whatever lands in the trunk will be available for integration. That is a way better model than waiting god-knows-how-long. Being able to integrate into suprojects in 3 months at max is pretty good, we can follow what is going on in the trunk more closely, while still having their discretion in releasing however they see fit.
I think that, presented like this, will solve a lot of issues I have mentioned previously. On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 6:13 PM Josh McKenzie <[email protected]> wrote: > > we would be basically releasing "all the time" so I > would welcome it if other people start to participate in releases as > well or we make it more manageable > > IMO releasing should be almost completely automated and simple outside > running the voting thread. A predictable cadence like this for just the core > project, much less for all subprojects, will force our hand on automating > everything that's not already (including PMC members certifying releases for > their vote). > > I plan to focus on that once I have the JDK21 stuff ironed out. > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2025, at 11:19 AM, Ekaterina Dimitrova wrote: > > I like how Bernardo called it - North star. My proposal - let’s align the > process between the main and the subprojects, and if at the end of a quarter > it doesn’t make sense for a subproject to have a release - bring it here and > agree to skip it. > > On Thu, 13 Nov 2025 at 11:03, Štefan Miklošovič <[email protected]> > wrote: > > That is a reasonable proposal - to at least somehow align subprojects > with the main Cassandra repository. Cassandra is integrating with e.g. > Cassandra Analytics and a lot of times Analytics integrates with what > is happening in core Cassandra. The situation now is that even if the > feature is in Cassandra's trunk we can not integrate it into Analytics > (e.g. writing SSTables with a ZSTD compression dictionary from Spark > jobs, or constraints) because there is actually "nothing to integrate > with" when Cassandra is not released yet. I think this could speed up > the delivery of features because for now we just wait till 6.0 is out > to start to integrate it, basically (or we can integrate it already if > we run on some concrete commit in trunk but developing against that is > like being on a quick sand). > > On the other hand, I am afraid that quarterly release schedule for > subprojects might be just "way too often". If there is not a lot of > traffic in subprojects then sticking to releasing it just for the sake > of it is not good either. I think there should be some actual > improvements / fixes etc. we want to release instead of just cutting > releases left and right "because it's time". > > This whole release proposal also puts committers / pmcs under more > stress / load as we would be basically releasing "all the time" so I > would welcome it if other people start to participate in releases as > well or we make it more manageable for the actual number of people > already actually releasing / verifying. > > On Thu, Nov 13, 2025 at 4:39 PM Bernardo Botella > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I would like to take the opportunity to discuss as well the possibility of > > adding the subprojects to this release cadence. I think the entire Apache > > Cassandra ecosystem would benefit from that consistent and predictable > > release schedules, and not only the main project. > > > > I see potential benefits from this for the subprojects other than the one > > discussed in this thread: > > - IMHO, this show consistency and care for our users. > > - The subprojects are also seen as first class citizens in the Apache > > Cassandra ecosystem. > > > > I understand that different subprojects are at different stages of > > releases, (aka, sidecar is under heavy development. Analytics is still > > fighting with some issues to release its 0.2.0 version, etc), that may (or > > may not) make them not suitable for the general release cadence that we all > > agree upon, but at least, aligning with that should be the North Star for > > everyone. > > > > Regards, > > Bernardo > > > > > > > On Nov 13, 2025, at 7:22 AM, Josh McKenzie <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> If we decided that Dec 1 is the cutoff, how would that work? > > > What do you mean? I don't understand the question =/ > > > > > > To the question about user confusion, I think Jeremiah covers it. > > > 6.0-beta1 and 7.0-alpha1 clearly communicate the different scopes and > > > levels of maturity of each release cycle even were they to be made > > > available concurrently. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 12, 2025, at 2:35 PM, Patrick McFadin wrote: > > >> Imagining how this would work. If we decided that Dec 1 is the cutoff, > > >> how would that work? > > >> > > > > > > >
