Hi Zoltan,

Yes, I’m all for regular quarterly releases like we’ve been doing. I was just 
specifically calling out the code freeze timelines and it would be helpful to 
have an overall tentative schedule laid out so folks know what to expect and 
when.

>> I'm happy to leave the branch open for a week - just don't want to block the 
>> master branch for new features which are ok to have in the next release.
> Does that sounds good?

This sounds good to me.

Thanks,
Abhishek

On 2026/01/12 09:10:47 Zoltan Haindrich wrote:
> Hey Abhishek,
> 
> I think you are right the first email should have been sent out earlier - but 
> the regular schedule is more-or less to have a release in every quarter.
> I'm a big believer in that the stream of regular releases are more important 
> than having everything in them - if there would be just a single release in 
> 1-2 years the push 
> to have a long code-freeze during which even features would be landed would 
> be bigger...but with every quarter: if you miss this you could just have it 
> in the next release.
> 
> 
> I do think that cutting the branch is just a step which enables to finalize 
> the release branch - the release will only get more serious when the RC 
> builds is created.
> 
> I'm happy to leave the branch open for a week - just don't want to block the 
> master branch for new features which are ok to have in the next release.
> Does that sounds good?
> 
> cheers,
> Zoltan
> 
> 
> On 1/10/26 4:43 AM, Abhishek Balaji Radhakrishnan wrote:
> > Hi Zoltan,
> > 
> > Thank you for volunteering to be the release manager for 36.0.0!
> > 
> > In my opinion, a one-day notice is too short for a code freeze. A week’s 
> > heads-up would be really helpful so community developers can plan changes, 
> > get in-flight reviews expedited and prioritized accordingly. I’m not sure 
> > if there’s a process we have for the project, but I’m happy to start a 
> > separate discussion if that would be useful for future releases.
> > 
> > I see that the 36.0.0 branch has already been cut. What do you think about 
> > having a “soft” code freeze for a week where contributors are still able to 
> > backport changes, after which we only backport release blockers, security 
> > and other critical bug fixes?
> > 
> > I personally had plans to get some changes going, but I'm prioritizing 
> > reviews for https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/18731 if we can get that 
> > into 36.0.0, assuming the patch is ready to be merged by then.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Abhishek
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On 2026/01/09 16:50:55 Zoltan Haindrich wrote:
> >> Hey All,
> >>
> >> I've branched off [36.0.0](https://github.com/apache/druid/tree/36.0.0) at 
> >> 7fc05156ab1165563455a617a0cc87990f2ad783 patch (current HEAD)
> >> The vuln scan found that xz should be above 1.10.2 - have some license 
> >> issues in the [PR](https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/18898) it looks 
> >> like we won't get huge issues
> >> from this direction.
> >> The version update PR for the master branch [is 
> >> here](https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/18899)
> >>
> >> cheers,
> >> Zoltan
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/7/26 5:59 PM, Zoltan Haindrich wrote:
> >>> Hello all,
> >>>
> >>> To keep the regular pace of Druid releases; 36.0.0 should be rolled out 
> >>> in the upcoming month or so.
> >>> I would like to volunteer to be the release manager for this one.
> >>> Every earlier releases was started around the first few weeks of the 
> >>> quarter... :)
> >>> It would be nice to open the branch this week.
> >>>
> >>> There are some interesting issues/PRs marked in the milestone [1].
> >>> * HttpRemoteTaskRunner enhancements #18851  [2]
> >>>     * seems like a a valuable PR - maybe the winter break have made it 
> >>> lag behind a bit...
> >>>     * its not a correctness issue - so I don't think it could be a blocker
> >>> * Realtime scans from MSQ cannot reliably read complex types #18340 [5]
> >>>     * not sure if this could be a blocker - as earlier versions were also 
> >>> affected by this limitation.
> >>> * Segment Load/Drop Race Causes Silent Partial Query Results #18738 [3]
> >>>     * has a lot of related discussions and some PRs
> >>>     * "Change segment state on HttpLoadQueuePeon ..."  [4] seems to be 
> >>> fixing some part of the issue - but its not yet finished
> >>>     * I believe these race conditions were hiding in quite a few earlier 
> >>> versions without being uncovered - I would like to rely on Kashif / 
> >>> @jtuglu1 to decide if this
> >>> should block the release or not.
> >>>
> >>> If there is anything more which should be discussed please reply to this 
> >>> thread and/or mark it on github with the 36.0.0 milestone [1] so that it 
> >>> doesn't fall off the radar!
> >>>
> >>> cheers,
> >>> Zoltan
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/65
> >>> [2] https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/18851
> >>> [3] https://github.com/apache/druid/issues/18738
> >>> [4] https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/18824
> >>> [5] https://github.com/apache/druid/issues/18340
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > 
> 
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to