Quarterly it is then! > Any chance of your going to 1.4 Francis so we can let Andrew's effort at unhitching 1.3 complete? Not right now we have some big high priority tasks that can't really be pushed out. Tho we'll start pushing internal patches upstream and see which branches they land and decide which is the most viable. It will be much easier for us to move to branches that have most of our changes especially the big ones tho not a deal breaker but will definitely be easier to get buy in.
Thanks, Francis On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 12:58 PM Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > Quarterly seems fine. > > Still too many branches though. > > Any chance of your going to 1.4 Francis so we can let Andrew's effort at > unhitching 1.3 complete? > > Thanks, > S > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:32 AM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I have been releasing 1.4 semi-monthly (usually, monthly) and Sean has > been > > releasing 1.2 every quarter. So maybe quarterly releases would be good? > > What do others think? What is the minimum release schedule to make it > worth > > your while for commits/backports to a branch? At least once every half > > year? More often? > > > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 11:23 AM Francis Christopher Liu < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > 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 > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Andrew > > > > Words like orphans lost among the crosstalk, meaning torn from truth's > > decrepit hands > > - A23, Crosstalk > > >
