I would rather have a VOTE that makes our consensus clear for things like EOL for branches, especially one that has had the stable pointer previously. I don't think lazy consensus is a sufficient bar in that case.
It sounds like everyone is agreeable to EOL so I'll go start the thread. On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 2:00 PM Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: > Sounds like an omission on my part -- I just didn't follow through on the > necessary steps after our decision to EOL. I'd rather not VOTE because > there was already lazy consensus around the discussions. > > Regardless of remaining internal community action, is there a checklist for > RMs to follow when a release line reaches end of life? > > Thanks, > Nick > > On Thu, Jan 20, 2022 at 9:17 AM Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Let’s vote. The stable pointer has been moved so there should be no > vetos. > > > > > On Jan 20, 2022, at 7:25 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi folks! > > > > > > Our Peter was asking in Slack about how to find the announcement for > EOL > > on > > > HBase 2.3 releases. I did some digging around and I think there's been > a > > > miscommunication. > > > > > > The page header on our project's space on the ASF downloads page[1] > > > currently says 2.3 was EOL in October 2021. But none of the usual > cleanup > > > has happened; namely 2.3.7 is still in our project download hosting and > > > listed on our download page. > > > > > > I’ve found this discussion of EOL 2.3 which we listed in our board > > report: > > > https://s.apache.org/i56se > > > > > > That discussion basically ended with "we need to have the stable > pointer > > > updated to 2.4 first". After that discussion 2.3.7 was released. I > can't > > > find any further discussion or a VOTE thread. > > > > > > Personally I think we ought to just do a quick VOTE to make it EOL and > > > clean things up. > > > > > > What do others think? > > > > > > [1]: https://downloads.apache.org/hbase/ > > >
