Moving the discussion back to the dev list. Val, Andrey, for that purpose we can ask INFRA to create a special mandatory field such as "Architecture" with two predefined values - "Ignite 2.x" and "Ignite 3.x". Come up with a better name, it needs to be intuitive enough even for users who submit issues. What disturbs me is that neither Kafka nor Spark have a different project for the recently released versions 3. A different GitHub project is not that disturbing.
- Denis On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 4:09 AM Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > Denis, > > From a purely technical perspective, these are indeed two separate > projects, because they are based on different codebases. The split you're > talking about happened a year ago, when we created the repo for Ignite 3. > This significantly differs from the 1.x->2.x transition, as these two > shared the codebase. > > For the same reason, a bug filed for 2.x can't be just transitioned to > 3.x. It will either not exist in 3.x in the first place, or will require a > completely different fix, which will mean two different tickets. > > That said, I still believe that Ignite 2 and Ignite 3 are just different > versions of the same product, because, as you correctly mentioned, they > target "same users, community, use cases". At the same time, they are > developed as different projects on the technical level. Let's not confuse > these two aspects with each other - they are largely orthogonal. > > At this point, creating a Jira project doesn't change anything > fundamentally. It's only about ease of use of our tooling and efficient > ticket management. > > -Val > > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 10:15 PM Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Folks, you confuse me. I've never treated Ignite 3 as a different >> project. It's the same Ignite (distributed database for high-performance >> computing...) but on a modernized architecture and APIs - thus, a major >> version. Same users, community, use cases. >> >> But, I'm against separate JIRA or Confluence projects. This is how you're >> truly stepping on a project-split path. When we used to work on Ignite 2 we >> could live within the same JIRA space with Ignite 1. Moreover, many tickets >> that are filed against Ignite 2 can be fixed in Ignite 3 only - which is a >> version change in our JIRA. >> >> So, -1 from me for the separate JIRA proposal. >> >> - >> Denis >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 8:23 AM Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Val, >>> >>> I don't see any issues having different projects under Ignite's brand >>> from the developer's side except the versioning issue. This is a bad >>> case when two different projects must have dependent versions and even >>> worse when some marketing things affect the development and release >>> processes. >>> >>> I agree with Nikolay and Ilya - the right way here is having >>> "Ignite<new-gen abrv>" and versioning started from zero. However, both >>> of Ignite's can easily co-exist. >>> >>> On Tue, 21 Sept 2021 at 22:13, Valentin Kulichenko >>> <valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > Ilya, >>> > >>> > What exactly is this different focus and different values? Why exactly >>> do you think Ignite 3 will never cover all the current features? And why is >>> this the criteria in the first place? I work on both Ignite 2 and Ignite 3 >>> almost every day and I simply don't think all this is true. I honestly >>> can't understand what this fuss is all about. >>> > >>> > Folks, quite frankly, this discussion seems counterproductive at this >>> point. Are there any particular suggestions? If so, let's discuss them. >>> Otherwise, let's just do some coding - isn't that why we are all here? :) >>> > >>> > -Val >>> > >>> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 9:52 PM Ilya Kasnacheev < >>> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hello! >>> >> >>> >> I concur with Nikolay. Maybe Ignite 3 should be called "Ignite <some >>> adverb>" because it is a product with a different focus and values which >>> has no plans to cover the entirety of Ignite's features. >>> >> >>> >> Regards, >>> >> -- >>> >> Ilya Kasnacheev >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> вт, 21 сент. 2021 г. в 17:56, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: >>> >>> >>> >>> Hello, Ignite PMC. >>> >>> >>> >>> Is there any reason to keep calling Ignite3 as "Ignite"? >>> >>> >>> >>> It seems to me that from the very beginning Ignite3 is a new >>> database engine built on completely new architecture. >>> >>> Ignite2 and Ignite3 has nothing similar except the name. All is >>> different >>> >>> - source code. >>> >>> - repository. >>> >>> - features. >>> >>> - API. >>> >>> - road map. >>> >>> - contributors. >>> >>> - contribution rules. >>> >>> - release cycle. >>> >>> *** you are here *** >>> >>> - jira >>> >>> - confluence >>> >>> >>> >>> Should we accept the fact that thing we calling as "Ignite3" is just >>> another project? >>> >>> Can you, please, share your vision on how Ignite and Ignite3 should >>> coexists? >>> >>> >>> >>> вт, 21 сент. 2021 г. в 17:13, Dmitry Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org>: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Ok, if nobody minds, I'll create spaces a bit later. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> I hope it is not too urgent. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Sincerely, >>> >>>> Dmitriy Pavlov >>> >>>> >>> >>>> On 2021/09/21 10:37:42, Valentin Kulichenko < >>> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > Hi Dmitry, >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > According to Infra, this has to be done through >>> http://selfserve.apache.org/, >>> >>>> > but only PMC chairs have access. >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > Could you please assist with the creation of the Jira project and >>> >>>> > Confluence space? >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > -Val >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 10:46 AM Valentin Kulichenko < >>> >>>> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > >>> >>>> > > Infra requests created: >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-22349 >>> >>>> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-22350 >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > -Val >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 10:50 AM Petr Ivanov < >>> mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > > >>> >>>> > >> +1 >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> > >> Since we've agreed that there are two projects (that are >>> Ignite2 and >>> >>>> > >> Ignite3), separate development environments seem to be logical >>> and natural >>> >>>> > >> course of things. >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> > >> > On 18 Sep 2021, at 12:42, Alexander Polovtcev < >>> alexpolovt...@gmail.com> >>> >>>> > >> wrote: >>> >>>> > >> > >>> >>>> > >> > +1 >>> >>>> > >> > This is a welcome proposal, because we already have some >>> pending Ignite >>> >>>> > >> 3 >>> >>>> > >> > specific documents, and it is not clear where to put them at >>> the moment. >>> >>>> > >> > >>> >>>> > >> > On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 4:22 AM Valentin Kulichenko < >>> >>>> > >> > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> > >> > >>> >>>> > >> >> Igniters, >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> I think it's clear to all of us that Ignite 2.x and 3.x >>> will coexist >>> >>>> > >> for a >>> >>>> > >> >> while. They are developed in separate Git repos, but we >>> still >>> >>>> > >> accumulate >>> >>>> > >> >> the tickets for both versions in the same Jira project, >>> which seems to >>> >>>> > >> >> complicate the ticket management. >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> For example, we use the "ignite-3" label for 3.x tickets, >>> but this >>> >>>> > >> approach >>> >>>> > >> >> is fragile. If someone forgets to add the label to a new >>> ticket, it's >>> >>>> > >> >> likely to be lost. We need a better separation. >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> All the above is true for Wiki as well - we use a single >>> Confluence >>> >>>> > >> space. >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> I suggest creating a new Jira project and a new Confluence >>> space for >>> >>>> > >> Ignite >>> >>>> > >> >> 3 and moving all the relevant tickets and pages there. >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> Any thoughts or objections? >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> >> -Val >>> >>>> > >> >> >>> >>>> > >> > >>> >>>> > >> > >>> >>>> > >> > -- >>> >>>> > >> > With regards, >>> >>>> > >> > Aleksandr Polovtcev >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> > >> >>> >>>> > >>> >>
