> Given there was no release activity on 1.3 all year may I ask how you are using 1.3? Are you consuming upstream changes by cherry pick into an internal branch? It depends on the urgency of an internal release we either pull in all changes up to a release, tip or cherry-pick. For the more recent releases we've been cherry picking. Tho we intend to pull in all changes again. BTW I did release 1.3.2 in March.
>It’s great that you’ve stepped forward to offer ongoing RM activity. We will need this commitment and a new pattern of more frequent releasing to justify keeping the code line alive, I think. Let me know what would be an acceptable release cadence and I'll carve out time. >Did you see that I stepped forward to make a release? There is a VOTE thread now for 1.3.3RC0. Perhaps we can start there? Would you use it? Would you +1? Or are there changes in there that are of concern? Please consider commenting on the VOTE. Yes we will use it, my intention is to be as current to branch-1.3 as possible. Yes, I intend to vote on the release. I am currently running the unit test and going through the release. Apologies for you having to cut the release. Thanks, Francis On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 8:48 AM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > It’s been a year since the last release. For what it’s worth I see no harm > in continuing to release 1.3, but you have to consider how burdensome it is > to have an open code line that bug fixes need to be committed into. Given > there was no release activity on 1.3 all year may I ask how you are using > 1.3? Are you consuming upstream changes by cherry pick into an internal > branch? Or are you not consuming any upstream changes at all? If the > latter, then what’s the point? If the former, it still isn’t great, because > while changes may be getting out into production somewhere it’s only you > who is benefitting. We need releases from branch-1.3 a lot more frequently > or it’s a bad deal for the community. Committers have to deal with > effectively a dead branch. Users get no releases. Given the consensus > expressed on this thread we don’t want this deal. It’s great that you’ve > stepped forward to offer ongoing RM activity. We will need this commitment > and a new pattern of more frequent releasing to justify keeping the code > line alive, I think. > > Did you see that I stepped forward to make a release? There is a VOTE > thread now for 1.3.3RC0. Perhaps we can start there? Would you use it? > Would you +1? Or are there changes in there that are of concern? Please > consider commenting on the VOTE. > > > > On Dec 17, 2018, at 8:31 AM, Francis Christopher Liu < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Apologies a bit late to this discussion. I would still like to continue > > making 1.3 releases. If the concern is having a better cadence of > releases > > let me know how often the community would like (quarterly, every other > > month, etc) and I'll make sure to carve out time with my employer. We > will > > be on 1.3 for a while. I believe it would be beneficial for the community > > and my employer for us to be on an active release line, hence my > interest. > > > > Let me know what you guys think? > > > > Thanks, > > Francis > > > > > >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 6:04 PM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Thank you all for your comments. It looks like we have consensus to EOL > 1.3 > >> and RM one final release. I will start working on that release, 1.3.3, > now. > >> > >>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 8:50 AM Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 > >>> > >>>> On 12/7/18 2:24 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > >>>> We haven't had a release from branch-1.3 for a long time and do not > >>> appear > >>>> to have an active RM for it. Unless a RM for 1.3 steps forward and > >>> promises > >>>> to make a release in the very near future, I propose we make one more > >>>> release of 1.3, from the head of branch-1.3, and then retire the > >> branch. > >>> If > >>>> this is acceptable I can RM the final 1.3 release. > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Best regards, > >> Andrew > >> > >> Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > >> decrepit hands > >> - A23, Crosstalk > >> >
