@Alexander, I don't believe that we can use the "DISCUSS" thread to have
made a decision that we are going to do something.
Imo, it gauges interest rather than making a decision.
I would rather see the "VOTE" thread to be started, detailing the
proposal and process how this will work. As I don't see how we can make
decision on anything that isn't clearly defined. With clearly defined, I
mean, what is the process regarding a major, minor and patch release. I
agree with @Anthony, that all releases are treated equally... But as
@Ken and @John have stated, what happens to the *patch* number? If it
becomes a redundant, red-taped release, then we might end up with only
*major*.*minor* releases.
--Udo
On 10/8/18 13:37, Alexander Murmann wrote:
Hi all,
Given the overwhelmingly positive response, I added a release schedule page
to the wiki:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Release+Schedule
Given the many "+1"s in this thread, can this be seen as agreed or do we
need a formal [VOTE] thread?
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 1:34 PM Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote:
It’s an ASF requirement that PMC’s shepherd releases through a prescribed
set of practices. It doesn’t matter if a release is major, minor, or
patch—they all must be voted and approved the the PMC.
Anthony
On Oct 8, 2018, at 1:04 PM, John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote:
Also, a huge +1 to Ken's suggestion of actually using the
maintenance/patch
release version major.minor.*patch*, perhaps without all the "Apache
ceremony" around releasing. Patches, should be quick and painless.
