+1 I also agree with pushing for a 0.6-incubating release asap. In general, it causes me some headaches when developing on a separate branch (merging/rebase issues, hard-to-understand development process), but in this case we should really not let the legal / infra stuff block our regular development process. I'm going to start working on the release-related stuff soon (signing keys, licensing, maven infra) and push out a first release candidate then. However, I'm planning to go on vacation next week, so I'm not going to work at full speed. But I'm confident to find enough time to keep the ball rolling.
On a side note, there was another email-thread opened at the same day as this one, named "0.6-incubating release" to plan the release. In my opinion, it would have been better to continue the discussion there. Robert On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Fabian Hueske <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > > 2014-07-16 21:59 GMT+02:00 Fabian Hueske <[email protected]>: > > > +1 > > > > > > 2014-07-16 20:37 GMT+02:00 Henry Saputra <[email protected]>: > > > > +1 > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Stephan Ewen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Hi everyone! > >> > > >> > We just had a hangout discussion (see previous mails for minutes and > >> > recording) where we talked about getting the first incubator release > of > >> > Flink out. > >> > > >> > Legal is blocked on the trademark issue until we make a release and we > >> > thought it cannot hurt to get the process started soon, because the > >> first > >> > release is going to take a while. > >> > > >> > > >> > A suggestion we came up was to: > >> > > >> > - Do a feature-freeze now, collect a shortlist of crucial bugs (not > >> even > >> > "important enhancements") to fix, and start with the release process > >> very > >> > soon. > >> > > >> > - Concurrently add the critical improvements and other upcoming > feature > >> > patches to a different branch. > >> > > >> > - Once the release has been cleared and the release is out there, we > >> > rebase the feature branch and continue from there. > >> > > >> > It would give us the advantage to get out of the name limbo soon and > >> > pipeline the legal overhead for the first release. The successive > >> release > >> > could be very soon after the initial one. > >> > > >> > How do you feel about this? > >> > > >> > Greetings, > >> > Stephan > >> > > > > >
